Originally posted by C-3POTheClever
Personally, I prefer other types of Sympathetic Villains. I think they can be more interesting. For example - TwoFace's backstory in the comics is far more interesting than it is in the Dark Knight in y opinion. Also, Sylar from Heroes is a much more sympathetic Villain, because his power is a curse that consumed him. I find him really interesting. I guess I prefer that kind of Villain.

Well (going by Batman Begins) I'm not sure Ras al Ghul quite fits in the 'doing it for lols' bracket, because he did seem to genuinly believe that what he was doing was the right thing/. From his point of view Gotham was a wicked city that deserved to be punished, so while he is a bad guy, he's not quite like the Joker.

Also, (going by Spider-man 1) It appears Norman Osborn developed a bit a split personality/Schizophrenia. I think left to himself, he wasn't particularly evil, but this other being basically took control over him, & made him into the monster we all know. He was basically driven insane.

I was more fitting Ras' into the "genius/the ends justify the means" bracket.

And agreed on Norman, but how he developed his insane persona doesn't matter as much as the fact that he did. Goblin IS the insane persona. Plus, Goblin was just doing things Norman wanted to do but had the sense not to. Killing and tormenting anyone who crossed him or didn't like. It was all under the hood long before Goblin came about.

I was also kind of interjecting comic Goblin into there, who doesn't really always have a justification for the things he does outside of "for the lols". I wish they put that more into the movie tbh