What makes a worthy villain?

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Gideon
Disclaimer: After consulting with Captain REX via MSN, I have concluded that this forum is da spot for this thread entitled "What makes a villain?". So, basically, for those of you who might say "Oi, dis belongs in teh movies section!!1!", REX will bring down the wrath of hell upon your immortal souls.]

As someone who enjoys a good movie, I find myself agreeing with Roger Ebert's sentiment that "a movie is only good as its villain" since they are ultimately the characters who drive the plot and likely serve as catalysts for the protagonists; I also happened to finish rereading Deathly Hallows today, and upon my third read, I consider Voldemort to be a lackluster villain. Despite his reputed intellect and charisma, he's portrayed as remarkably incompetent.

Basically, I'm curious as to what you all think makes a worthy villain.


Edit: This applies to all genres: movies, video games, and literature.

chillmeistergen
Probably shouldn't base your reading around the subject on Harry Potter books.

I wouldn't say much makes a worthy villain, apart from very good acting (in a movie). In a book, it's different; generally a good villain is slowly introduced and becomes further involved in the story and thus haunts the hero's thoughts and life. No Country For Old Men (book), turned this on its head, giving both hero and villain a narrative based around them and also having villainous, or grimy aspects centered around the hero.

EDIT: That sounded disrespectful to cinema, in no way is it. To further explain, in cinema, I think a good villain is one with charisma, like Lil Ze in Cidade de Deus, for example.

Rogue Jedi
I would say someone who is willing to achieve their goal with no regards for the welfare of others.

Symmetric Chaos
There are too many different factors to settle on what makes a good villain. The only one that I think applies to every good villain is to have an interesting motive (or lack thereof in some cases).

Gideon
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Probably shouldn't base your reading around the subject on Harry Potter books.

It was the catalyst that drove me to thinking about this subject. The character of Voldemort is becoming as popular as the likes of Darth Vader and Hannibal Lector, but how incompetent he is portrayed really grinds my gears. To have a reputation of brilliance isn't enough when every time he makes an appearance he looks like a fool.



I've neither read the book or watched the movie, but their acclaim is considerable. Recommend it?



I'm torn on that issue as well. Two of my most favorite villains are Palpatine and Magneto, even though they're very different. Palpatine is perhaps the most evil of all villains in popular culture, possessed of a peerless intellect, yet a lot of people have troubles with his "one dimension" in that all he craves is power. He has no sympathetic moments. We can't relate to him. Magneto, on the other hand, is nowhere near as manipulative or as vicious, but we see his motivation and can understand why he feels the way that he does.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Gideon
It was the catalyst that drove me to thinking about this subject. The character of Voldemort is becoming as popular as the likes of Darth Vader and Hannibal Lector, but how incompetent he is portrayed really grinds my gears. To have a reputation of brilliance isn't enough when every time he makes an appearance he looks like a fool.

Soulja Boy's popular too, don't buy into it.



Originally posted by Gideon
I've neither read the book or watched the movie, but their acclaim is considerable. Recommend it?

Yeah, I recommend both.

Gideon
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Soulja Boy's popular too, don't buy into it.

And much like Soulja Boi and the whole hip-hop/rap genre, how can people buy into this shit?



I'll make me a few purchases then.

Zeal Ex Nihilo
There are a few things that make a worthy villain.

1. A worthy villain is complicated.
Someone like Hannibal Lecter is an interesting villain. Someone like the Joker is an interesting villain. Someone like Venom is an interesting villain. Shai'Tan (from the Wheel of Time series) or Sauron is not an interesting villain.

Of course, this doesn't necessarily apply if...

2. A worthy villain makes you hate him.
Or her. And not just in a "I bake puppies into pies and throw babies out windows!" kind of way. Really, I think the best example in recent years would be Dolores Umbridge. God, she's a c*nt.

3. A worthy villain isn't genre-blind.
That is to say, he doesn't make the same mistakes over and over again or needlessly-complex, easily-foiled plots. Unless he's the Joker, because that's kind of the Joker's thing.

4. A worthy villain makes you think.
While this isn't specifically necessary to make a worthy villain, I find it compelling. Some villains, like Dr. Doom, make you think to yourself, "Is he really that much of a bad guy?" If you can sympathize with a villain or question whether or not he's a bad guy, he might be a worthy villain.

Gideon
A thought provoking post.

Dolores Umbridge was an excellent example; Stephen King himself raved how Umbridge was the best fictional villain since Hannibal Lector, and she is absolutely revolting. She is, actually, one of the few villains that I can't stand, not because she's incompetent or a failure but because she's that vile. As far as the Joker is concerned, I'm at a disadvantage. Even though Magneto is one of my very favorite villains, I only know anything about him because of the X-Men movies; I don't read comic books. So that is to say that every cartoon depiction of the Joker is very much a disappointment to me. Where is the threat? His foe is an unimaginably resourceful and clever superhero and the Joker, to me, doesn't represent a credible threat.

Should the best sort of villains be one that you hate? Like Umbridge or Ralph Fiennes' Amon Goeth? Or should they be sympathetic ones such as Magneto or Darth Vader? Or should they be what we consider to be the badasses and the ones who impress us?

King Kandy
They all have their own qualities. They really shouldn't be compared because they are like different groups altogether. Personally in terms of vileness I think Archibald Cunningham from "Rob Roy" is much worse then Umbridge.

chillmeistergen
There's more to literature than comics and children's books. There's plenty of fantastic villains about, Frankenstein for example, (no, not the monster). Plus plenty more, nurse Ratched, Mr Hyde...the list goes on.

Zeal Ex Nihilo
I think that they should be both. "Badassery," to me, has nothing to do with making a worthy villain. The reason that Joker is a threat is because he's insane, clever, and willing to hurt other people to get to Batman (at least this is what I've gathered; I'm not a big Batman fan).

I think that being repulsive or being sympathetic all depends on the particular villain. Magneto, like you mentioned, really isn't such a bad guy, after all. And Darth Vader is pitiable, especially given his mess of a plot, and he has a spark of good in him after all. The repulsive villain is just another angle.

What I've found is that injustice makes people mad. Let someone in authority abuse his power, and they'll hate him all the more. Not even something like assassinating political opponents, mind you, but stuff that Umbridge does: she manipulates and twists the truth and abuses her position. It's the same reason that people hate crooked cops.

King Kandy
Oh yeah, I forgot about nurse Ratched. She's up there but I don't think she was THAT bad.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by King Kandy
Oh yeah, I forgot about nurse Ratched. She's up there but I don't think she was THAT bad.

Indirect malevolence is probably the most effective in story telling, I thought that's what we were talking about - not who creates the biggest explosions and pulls the best faces, as a villain.

King Kandy
Well however "subtle" her villainy was, she did not at all seem to stand out in terms of vile personality or deeds.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by King Kandy
Well however "subtle" her villainy was, she did not at all seem to stand out in terms of vile personality or deeds.

Are you having some sort of joke?

King Kandy
She was bad, no doubt, but there were other villains who made me hate them far more.

Symmetric Chaos
I think some of the scariest villains are the ones that are extremely normal part of the time. Villains like Hannibal Lector, Light Yagami or Dexter have a level of disturbing that only happens in a person who could be a good friend or even yourself.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Oh yeah, I forgot about nurse Ratched. She's up there but I don't think she was THAT bad.

She had a perfectly sane person lobotomized because he stood up to her . . .

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by King Kandy
She was bad, no doubt, but there were other villains who made me hate them far more.

Not always the point of a villain, though.

King Kandy
It seems the point of her as a villain. But she didn't stand out in terms of vileness, and she didn't stand out in terms of deeds. She actually didn't even stand out with her competency since McMurphy made short work of her dominance over the institution and the majority of her plans to stop him didn't work at all.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by King Kandy
It seems the point of her as a villain. But she didn't stand out in terms of vileness, and she didn't stand out in terms of deeds. She actually didn't even stand out with her competency since McMurphy made short work of her dominance over the institution and the majority of her plans to stop him didn't work at all.

You're an idiot, who obviously has no idea about any sort of complexity in literature or cinema. Stick to Batman.

King Kandy
Just what makes her a great villain? One Flew Over the Cuckoo's nest is one of my favorite books but she got ousted so fast.

chillmeistergen
Not really. A villain doesn't have to be ever present to be good, they can be a character that we only hear rumour of, or some sort of deity, it doesn't matter; what matters is how well they're written, presented, acted etc.

King Kandy
I agree with you. She is a good character mind you but she is a terrible villain.

chillmeistergen
I disagree, I think she shits all over Umbridge (who is most probably "influenced" by Ratched, like most of Rowling's second hand creations).

Dark-Jaxx
For one, a good backstory for why they became a villain. I hate villains that are evil for the simple sake of being evil. They need to have an understandable, but sympathetic reason, except special cases like Joker(who in the comics is at least Batman's intellectual equal). This is the only problem I have with Palpatine, no real reason behind his madness.

They need to be irredeemable as well, although they may not have once been evil, they are far past the point of no-return.

They need to be efficient. I hate how in videogames incompetant morons like Bowser and Sephiroth are given so much credit as a villain, but a competant and intelligent villain like Ganon does not.

They need to be badass, I mean seriously, everyone loves a badass. big grin

A good villain does not have simple mindless goals like "control the world", if their goal is world domination, the goal should be made more complex than that, like Ganon.

They need to look cool. Seriously, villains like Kuja are good...But the dude looks like a chick in a thong. That kinda stuff just bothers me. I personally like the big and muscular looking villains. Bit of a sick fetish for me actually.

chillmeistergen
To quote McLovin - "read a f*cking book".

Dark-Jaxx
Who was that directed to?

King Kandy
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I disagree, I think she shits all over Umbridge (who is most probably "influenced" by Ratched, like most of Rowling's second hand creations).
Well frankly, Umbridge never impressed me either.

King Kandy
Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
Who was that directed to?
You. Probably has to do with you only mentioning comic and video game characters.

Dark-Jaxx
Pffft.

ragesRemorse
a good villian NEEDS a chin that is pointy

chillmeistergen
A fair few people. To make it clear, I've got nothing against comics, or video games. I just don't like it when people can't see beyond one means of entertainment or literature, it'd be like me only quoting villains from poetry; there's only so far the book of Urizen can go.

Dark-Jaxx
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
A fair few people. To make it clear, I've got nothing against comics, or video games. I just don't like it when people can't see beyond one means of entertainment or literature, it'd be like me only quoting villains from poetry; there's only so far the book of Urizen can go. I quoted no villain, I only mentioned Ganon so many times because he is my favorite villain. Because in my "opinion" he is what a villain should be.

RocasAtoll
A good villain is just someone you can hate and despise. It doesn't matter if its a 10 year old's villain or a real literary villain.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
I quoted no villain, I only mentioned Ganon so many times because he is my favorite villain. Because in my "opinion" he is what a villain should be.

By quoted I meant mentioned, obviously. I didn't mean quoting a monologue of theirs.

Why have you put opinion in inverted commas?

Originally posted by RocasAtoll
A good villain is just someone you can hate and despise. It doesn't matter if its a 10 year old's villain or a real literary villain.

Disagree completely and utterly. To make a good villain, in my view there should be something very human at the root of them, and also a degree of charisma. Hate can come too easily, to evoke two emotions at the same time for one character, is much more of a feat and an experience for the reader.

Dark-Jaxx
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
By quoted I meant mentioned, obviously. I didn't mean quoting a monologue of theirs.

Why have you put opinion in inverted commas? Cuz you seem to like arguing them.

chillmeistergen
Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
Cuz you seem to like arguing them.

It's a debate. You're in the General Discussion Forum, get used to it.

Gideon
The responses have been intruiging so far and we seem to be very divided on certain points. Some say that the best sort of villains are the ones that you can't stand and wish would die and others believe that villains require charisma and something irretrievably human at their core.

Based on these answers, let me ask you all this: In Star Wars, the two most popular antagonists are Darth Vader and the Emperor. We see that Vader, despite his brutality, is more victim than villain, and is a pawn. He ultimately cares more for his children than he does for the Emperor's promises of power, though we also see that his cruelty is laced with dark ambition . The Emperor, as stated before, is evil in its darkest, purest form. Cold intellect and ambition, though he also seems to have a sadistic joy to his manipulations.

My question is, in such an epic, would it have made sense to portray Palpatine -- the main villain -- as anything but irredeemable? Or should all villains have a little good in them?

Devil King
Context
Motivation
Believabilty
Commitment

Dark-Jaxx
Originally posted by Gideon
My question is, in such an epic, would it have made sense to portray Palpatine -- the main villain -- as anything but irredeemable? Or should all villains have a little good in them? No, he should be pure evil, but also possess a reason for how he got that way.

chillmeistergen
How very thought provoking.

Gideon
Originally posted by Dark-Jaxx
No, he should be pure evil, but also possess a reason for how he got that way.

I'll play the devil's advocate here, with the intent to inspire further discussion. Is there a logical reason for someone to become pure evil? Ian McDiarmid's commentary regarding the Emperor is that he is "worse than Satan" because "at least Satan has a history, and it's one of revenge" -- Lucifer was once the most prominent of all angels and a being of good. Voldemort is another being of pure evil, and his backstory is one that he has no understanding of love. Never did .

Devil King
There is no reason to explain Palpatine as anything. One of the major faults with the idea that Mr. Lucas had to explain things is one of the reasons the Prequel Triology sucked. The idea that Palpatine needs to explain his motivation or goals serves to do nothing short of crapping all over the already well-established mythology of Star Wars.

chillmeistergen
Lucifer was thought of as somewhat of a hero by the Romantics, as he tried to bring democracy to heaven. An interesting take on things.

Gideon
Originally posted by Devil King
There is no reason to explain Palpatine as anything. One of the major faults with the idea that Mr. Lucas had to explain things is one of the reasons the Prequel Triology sucked. The idea that Palpatine needs to explain his motivation or goals serves to do nothing short of crapping all over the already well-established mythology of Star Wars.

I suppose I agree, especially with the scale and scope of the saga. It's a galaxy wide conflict with numerous moral layers. To have the main villain be anything but evil incarnate is a bit of a letdown.


Edit: An interesting bit of information, Chill.

Devil King
Originally posted by Gideon
I'll play the devil's advocate here, with the intent to inspire further discussion. Is there a logical reason for someone to become pure evil? Ian McDiarmid's commentary regarding the Emperor is that he is "worse than Satan" because "at least Satan has a history, and it's one of revenge" -- Lucifer was once the most prominent of all angels and a being of good. Voldemort is another being of pure evil, and his backstory is one that he has no understanding of love. Never did .

Revenge comes across as motivation, via the pathetic dialouge of the prequels, but such is not his motivation; his motivation is power and absolute control: to become God.

I don't know anything about Voldemort. That's far outside my generation's mythology.

Devil King
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Lucifer was thought of as somewhat of a hero by the Romantics, as he tried to bring democracy to heaven. An interesting take on things.

Which places him on the level of Magneto, far more than Palpatine.

And i don't consider Magneto to be a villain, only an anti-hero.

Gideon
Originally posted by Devil King
Revenge comes across as motivation, via the pathetic dialouge of the prequels, but such is not his motivation; his motivation is power and absolute control; to become God.

Precisely. Palpatine seems to clearly suffer from malignant narcissism. Until Lucas revealed Palpatine's delusions in the commentary (that the Emperor truly believes he's doing good), I always assumed Palpatine merely believed he was above the concepts of good and evil.



Like I've explained to Chill, Voldemort is clearly the most popular and prominent antagonist of our my day, hence why I am using him as a measuring stick. There are many interesting things about the character, but overall? He's a letdown. His incompetence is most frustrating.

Devil King
Evil can be defined as an absolute absence of apathy or sympathy. Palpatine can seemingly be attributed this characteristic. But, he cares about himself. A character like the Joker can not be assigned this particular scruple. And Magneto is far outside this parameter.

Palpatine cares about himself and his acheivments, what he can distill into himself. Very much a Hitler or Stalin or Satan type character; even if it wasn't his or their idea. Magneto has a goal outside himself, so he isn't applicable. Profound perhaps, but not a villain. The Joker is concerned with the harmful effects on his adversary, but would still be doing what he does without the Batman, which make his motivation less profound and obviously inentional, despite his total lack of concern or apathy for any and every one that is effected. The mindset of Palpatine is to do wrong to acheive a personal-inner goal; the mindset of Magneto is to maybe and forceablly do wrong to acheive some outer goal while thinking he's the best suited to see that goal to fruition, but the mindest of the Joker is to do it because it hurts others.

Gideon
Originally posted by Devil King
Evil can be defined as an absolute absence of apathy or sympathy. Palpatine can seemingly be attributed this characteristic. But, he cares about himself. A character like the Joker can not be assigned this particular scruple. And Magneto is far outside this parameter.

Palpatine cares about himself and his acheivments, what he can distill into himself. Very much a Hitler or Stalin or Satan type character; even if it wasn't his or their idea. Magneto has a goal outside himself, so he isn't applicable. Profound perhaps, but not a villain. The Joker is concerned with the harmful effects on his adversary, but would still be doing what he does without the Batman, which make his motivation less profound and obviously inentional, despite his total lack of concern or apathy for any and every one that is effected. The mindset of Palpatine is to do wrong to acheive a personal-inner goal; the mindset of Magneto is to maybe and forceablly do wrong to acheive some outer goal while thinking he's the best suited to see that goal to fruition, but the mindest of the Joker is to do it because it hurts others.

An excellent outlook. Not much to correct or oppose.


Edit: So does that mean that the Joker acknowledges his evil and revels in it? Or does he not believe in the concepts of good and evil?

Blax_Hydralisk
I'm pretty sure he revels in it. He just sits there and thinks of the most ****ed up, mentally/physically scarring thing he could possibly do to someone.

Gideon
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
I'm pretty sure he revels in it. He just sits there and thinks of the most ****ed up, mentally/physically scarring thing he could possibly do to someone.

Sounds like my mother.

Blax_Hydralisk
haermm

Gideon
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
haermm

No... seriously... no expression

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by Gideon
No... seriously... no expression








haermm

Devil King
Originally posted by Gideon
An excellent outlook. Not much to correct or oppose.


Edit: So does that mean that the Joker acknowledges his evil and revels in it? Or does he not believe in the concepts of good and evil?

The Joker revels in it; not because he considers it, but because he does not. These concepts, as such, should not enter his mind. And rarely has one over the course of his develpoment. Bottom line is that none of these characters exist in the real world. Satan, the Joker, or otherwise; which is why these attributes can not be ascribed to a human being or an angel, in reality. Hitler loved his dog and Stalin loved his daughter and Palpatine loved his absolutism...because he was fiction based upon supposed reality.

The fact that Palpatine was so evil is the very same argument that he should not have been explained so explicitly in the prequels. If Palpatine is to be the amorphous evil that we all suppose exists in the world, that tempts us all, then he should not be so human and explainable a character. That is why Vader is, and remains, the true villain of the Star Wars saga. He is the human character that chose the wrong path. He is the human with the blood of billions on his hands. And in our world, that implies villany. George Lucas just chose a lazy, selfish manner to explain it.

And if he'd proven to be such a student of Joseph Cambell, he'd have known that was an essential aspect to his story-telling.

Bardock42
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I disagree, I think she shits all over Umbridge (who is most probably "influenced" by Ratched, like most of Rowling's second hand creations).

You think?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Hunter

BackFire
I think there are too many different types of villains to really be able to have certain attributes that make them all good. Different ones for different types.

Really, the only requirement for all of them is that they simply need to be interesting in some way. Everything else is going to depend on the type.

xmarksthespot
Who the hell is Dolores Umbridge?

Relatable villains with whom you can empathize are generally good. People who aren't at their core bad people.

Although I do enjoy a good villain with a sociopath streak. Someone remarkably intelligent. Someone ingeniously manipulative. Someone who is fully lucid to the difference between right and wrong but doesn't particularly care. Someone for whom people are not people but merely toys for amusement. Someone who would boast about eating a man's liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. Someone like Hannibal Lecter, or Bardock.

DigiMark007
A mustachio that is receptive to twirling. Preferably while laughing maniacally.

That is all.

Gideon
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Who the hell is Dolores Umbridge?

Relatable villains with whom you can empathize are generally good. People who aren't at their core bad people.

Although I do enjoy a good villain with a sociopath streak. Someone remarkably intelligent. Someone ingeniously manipulative. Someone who is fully lucid to the difference between right and wrong but doesn't particularly care. Someone for whom people are not people but merely toys for amusement. Someone who would boast about eating a man's liver with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. Someone like Hannibal Lecter, or Bardock.

How do these sort of villains reconcile their actions or their methods, though, if they're sane and understand the concepts of good and evil.

RocasAtoll
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Disagree completely and utterly. To make a good villain, in my view there should be something very human at the root of them, and also a degree of charisma. Hate can come too easily, to evoke two emotions at the same time for one character, is much more of a feat and an experience for the reader.

Humanity and charisma are important, but they still are only reasons why you hate or despise someone. They still go back to the root of hatred.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Gideon
How do these sort of villains reconcile their actions or their methods, though, if they're sane and understand the concepts of good and evil.

For people like Joker or Hannibal Lecter they just don't bother with rationalization. They can do it, the fact that it's evil doesn't bother them. Villains like Light Yagami from Death Note simply assume that their perception of good and evil is superior. Light in particular convinces himself that everyone sees the world the way he does but that they're all too scared to admit it.

jaden101
DeNiro as Max Cady in cape fear is one of the best portrayals of a villian in my opinion

Devil King
Originally posted by Gideon
How do these sort of villains reconcile their actions or their methods, though, if they're sane and understand the concepts of good and evil.

Why would they need to reconcile their actions?

Robtard
So it can be a happy ending, people like happy endings.

Devil King
Speaking of villains, who is that in your avatar?

jaden101
Originally posted by Devil King
Speaking of villains, who is that in your avatar?

if you're referring to me...which i suspect you aren't but i'll answer anyway

it's from a music video by aphex twin called "come to daddy"

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5Az_7U0-cK0

have a watch

Devil King
Originally posted by jaden101
if you're referring to me...which i suspect you aren't but i'll answer anyway

it's from a music video by aphex twin called "come to daddy"

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5Az_7U0-cK0

have a watch

I already asked you that. I told you it looked like Nosfuratu eating a fraggle. Now I'm asking Robtard.

Robtard
Originally posted by Devil King
I already asked you that. I told you it looked like Nosfuratu eating a fraggle. Now I'm asking Robtard.

Matt Damon.

He did a great cameo in "Euro Trip".

Devil King
Originally posted by Robtard
Matt Damon.

He did a great cameo in "Euro Trip".

you know, I've been telling myself it looked like him for days. He played a fairly respectable villain in The Departed. But that clunky accent got in the way. He always sounded like he was calling for help.

Robtard
Odd that, since he's from Boston I think?

I liked his villain in The Talented Mr. Ripley.

Devil King
Never saw that one, I think. But I know he killed Jude Law, which I can appreciate.

Deja~vu
If I want to gouge out his eyes and cut him up in little pieces, punch the living daylights out of him, then he's a good villain. big grin

Robtard
Originally posted by Devil King
Never saw that one, I think. But I know he killed Jude Law, which I can appreciate.

Worth a watch.

jaden101
Originally posted by Devil King
Nosfuratu eating a fraggle.

nice image

Zeal Ex Nihilo
Originally posted by Devil King
Why would they need to reconcile their actions?
Simple: They don't. They think they're beyond silly concepts of morality and right/wrong.

Devil King
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Simple: They don't. They think they're beyond silly concepts of morality and right/wrong.

Exactly my point.

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
You're an idiot, who obviously has no idea about any sort of complexity in literature or cinema. Stick to Batman.

I will...thank you.

Gideon
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Simple: They don't. They think they're beyond silly concepts of morality and right/wrong.



I mentioned such a belief numerous times, I was just curious if that was the only route that a bad guy could sleep at night.

King Kandy
Villains who believe wholeheartedly that they are doing the right thing are interesting to read.

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by Gideon
I mentioned such a belief numerous times, I was just curious if that was the only route that a bad guy could sleep at night. I sleep just fine, thanks.

Gideon
Originally posted by King Kandy
Villains who believe wholeheartedly that they are doing the right thing are interesting to read.

Magneto is the only one whom I can think of.

Quiero Mota
Someone who you walk away from the theater hating, but you can't help but admire them for some strange reason.

Rampant ox
Personally, the most entertaining villains are those who are realistic. They need to be characters who you can truly beleive are real. My favourite is Caledon Hockley from 'Titanic'. Sure, he doesnt possess super-powers, doesnt have a lightsaber, nor does he have an amazing IQ - but none of this matters. He is the antagonist beause of his arrogant, jealous and controlling nature. These are traits that we all possess on varying levels, and because of this we an relate to the charater. It makes Hockley a very realistic character on screen; in turn making him much more interesting.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Gideon
Magneto is the only one whom I can think of.

Light Yagami
Ras A Gul (in the movie)
Various "evil" versions of Superman
Dexter
Vader (arguably)
Lelouche Lamperouge

Blax_Hydralisk
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Lelouche Lamperouge


This is the guy from that Anime, right?

xmarksthespot
Originally posted by Rampant ox
Personally, the most entertaining villains are those who are realistic. They need to be characters who you can truly beleive are real. My favourite is Caledon Hockley from 'Titanic'. Sure, he doesnt possess super-powers, doesnt have a lightsaber, nor does he have an amazing IQ - but none of this matters. He is the antagonist beause of his arrogant, jealous and controlling nature. These are traits that we all possess on varying levels, and because of this we an relate to the charater. It makes Hockley a very realistic character on screen; in turn making him much more interesting. I found the iceberg more interesting.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
This is the guy from that Anime, right?

Code Geass.

He might be more of an anti-hero but considering that he considers everyone but his sister to be human garbage that is useful only in advancing his own goals I'd put him within the ranks of villains.

Gideon
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I found the iceberg more interesting.

Deja~vu
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I will...thank you. Would you like to go out for some fries? Every-ones ignoring me... laughing out loud

Anywhoo......A villain has to be shinny and stuff......

Rampant ox
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I found the iceberg more interesting.

It lacks an expensive tuxedo, 8 figure bank balance and hot fiance. erm

Gideon
Originally posted by Rampant ox
It lacks an expensive tuxedo, 8 figure bank balance and hot fiance. erm

I found Hockley to be a bit of a douche. No menace or threat. The only cool thing about him was Spicer Lovejoy; Mr. Lovejoy was much more menacing, threatening, and David Warner kicks the shit out of the dude who played Hockley .

WrathfulDwarf
Originally posted by Deja~vu
Would you like to go out for some fries? Every-ones ignoring me... laughing out loud

Anywhoo......A villain has to be shinny and stuff......

Chili fries are good.

I thought a Knight had to be shinny and tall and whatever.

Rampant ox
Originally posted by Gideon
I found Hockley to be a bit of a douche. No menace or threat. The only cool thing about him was Spicer Lovejoy; Mr. Lovejoy was much more menacing, threatening, and David Warner kicks the shit out of the dude who played Hockley .

His name is Billy Zane.

A villain doesn't need to be menacing or threatening to be 'worthy'. They need to display qualities and attitudes which oppose that of the protagonist. This therefore creates the tension which drives the movie. Hockley, for example, epitomises arrogance and greed. He treats his fiance like a possession, and has no qualms when it comes to framing Jack on board a sinking ship. Jack, the 'good' guy, is the complete opposite. Humble, poor and caring; he contrasts Cal in every way. Jack would be a very boring character if there wasn't such a good villain to play off.

The fact that Cal Hockley is so realistic, and has a personality which we can all relate to on some level, makes him even more realistic. And I don't know about you, but realism to in a movie is a definite positive.

xmarksthespot
What's unrelatable about Hannibal Lecter?

How "that guy from Titanic" made it into discussion is beyond me...

Gideon
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What's unrelatable about Hannibal Lecter?

How "that guy from Titanic" made it into discussion is beyond me...

Agreed.
Do we have any Buffy fans in the house? Angelus is one of the greatest villains in my opinion.

Devil King
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
How "that guy from Titanic" made it into discussion is beyond me...

A profound misunderstanding of the thread's topic coupled with what seems like an age related inability to comprehend words like "worthy" and "epitomy".

Or maybe the kid just has a hard-on for the guy.

Robtard
He played an arrogrant and cowardly jerk, which is a common theme for an antagonist in love stories.

Gideon
Originally posted by Robtard
He played an arrogrant and cowardly jerk, which is a common theme for an antagonist in love stories.

And that's another thing. Many narratives make out how the antagonist is an utter coward; but if they are absolute cowards, they wouldn't dare oppose the protagonist or break the law, would they?

Martian_mind
Originally posted by Gideon
Agreed.
Do we have any Buffy fans in the house? Angelus is one of the greatest villains in my opinion.


thumb up

midnightshadow
do you mean angelus as he was before he got his soul or when he came back in season 2? i agree that before he got his soul he was a great villan, really evil with no concience and a thirst for madness and mayhem, but when he came back he was a little nuts and obsessive, and tried to destroy the world! i believe that true villans are the ones that do not want to destroy the world but to either rule it or to cause as much trouble in it as possable. any villan who wants to destroy the world just wants to die themselves and thinks that it would be great to take everyone with him, thats not villany thats stupidity!

villans are notoriously arrogant and wish people to bow before them. no-one is going to be able to do that if they are not here

Robtard
Originally posted by Gideon
And that's another thing. Many narratives make out how the antagonist is an utter coward; but if they are absolute cowards, they wouldn't dare oppose the protagonist or break the law, would they?

There's more than one aspect of being a coward.

Gideon
Originally posted by midnightshadow
do you mean angelus as he was before he got his soul or when he came back in season 2? i agree that before he got his soul he was a great villan, really evil with no concience and a thirst for madness and mayhem, but when he came back he was a little nuts and obsessive, and tried to destroy the world! i believe that true villans are the ones that do not want to destroy the world but to either rule it or to cause as much trouble in it as possable. any villan who wants to destroy the world just wants to die themselves and thinks that it would be great to take everyone with him, thats not villany thats stupidity!

villans are notoriously arrogant and wish people to bow before them. no-one is going to be able to do that if they are not here

Angelus in all aspects is an amazing villain. The only reason he attemped to unleash Acathla on the world and thus bring about the apocalypse is because that was the culmination of all his attempts to torture Buffy; his logic was "what better way to destroy Buffy (a compassionate, kind woman who loved her friends and family) than to destroy the world she fought so hard to protect?". His stalking of Buffy was simply chilling, killing Willow's goldfish to torment her, sneaking into Buffy's house and leaving her portraits (reminding her that he could have killed her in her sleep, but chose not to), and of course his brutal execution of Jenny Calender . Sadism at its finest. And then, of course, there's that whole thing in S4 of Angel where he totally mindscrews with the entire team... from inside a cage.

WrathfulDwarf
Villains based on real life people can be very freaky.

A good example would be Ralph Fiennes character in Schindler's List.

Even to this day...that character sickens me.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Gideon
Angelus in all aspects is an amazing villain. The only reason he attemped to unleash Acathla on the world and thus bring about the apocalypse is because that was the culmination of all his attempts to torture Buffy; his logic was "what better way to destroy Buffy (a compassionate, kind woman who loved her friends and family) than to destroy the world she fought so hard to protect?". His stalking of Buffy was simply chilling, killing Willow's goldfish to torment her, sneaking into Buffy's house and leaving her portraits (reminding her that he could have killed her in her sleep, but chose not to), and of course his brutal execution of Jenny Calender . Sadism at its finest. And then, of course, there's that whole thing in S4 of Angel where he totally mindscrews with the entire team... from inside a cage.

Yeah, Whedon explained Angelus evilness quite well in Angel. His fascination with elaborate schemes of torture in particular.

Neo Darkhalen
i think it depends in what context you are looking at, what makes a good villain for me is complexity in that they have multiple layers, they have real goals and desires, so you can identify with them a good villain should be able to inflict different emotions to the audience and make you think, they need to have there own will there own style and thoughts, a smart villain is always one to do this, however i think a villain should be well established to the case of the story, so if it's about planets being concerned the story should give hints or history to the villain before they are introduced and on that case i believe a villain should not be forced into a story just for the sake of them being there, his or her inclusion should flow well and have an impact with the story.

And on a last note i believe another good class of villain is a tragic villain these villains always make you think and at the end you are sad to see they have failed, they always manage to challenge your morals.

Gideon
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Villains based on real life people can be very freaky.

A good example would be Ralph Fiennes character in Schindler's List.

Even to this day...that character sickens me.



Amen.
It doesn't get worse than Nazis in real life. Ralph Fiennes as Amon Goeth was just chilling. A true spectacle of tortured, conflicted sadism. One of my favorite villains.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.