January 09 - Month of Villans

Discussion in 'Comic Books and Graphic Novels' started by General Magnus, Oct 1, 2008.

  1. General Magnus

    General Magnus Da Custodes of the Emprah

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    12,916
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +11
    Can´t say I like this, but oh well....

    Newsarama.com : DAN DIDIO ON FACES OF EVIL

    On the upside and thank god, this is not a major event. I can´t wait for things to return to normal "status quo" and end this "villans teh shit!!!!11" crap that has been plaging comics for a while.
     
  2. GW_Freak

    GW_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,835
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    Villains are the shit! They will always be way more interesting than the heroes.
     
  3. General Magnus

    General Magnus Da Custodes of the Emprah

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    12,916
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +11
    What´s interesting about "I want to rule the universe/planet/country" ? Bad stuff happens, we get the point.

    Villains should have victory in their grasp but NEVER achieve it. That´s what makes it interesting. See how they are going to be stopped.
     
  4. GW_Freak

    GW_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,835
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    WHat's interesting about being a sadist who enjoys beating the snot out of criminals?

    The number of villains out for world domination is actually a small contingent of the super villain population.
     
  5. Strikeback

    Strikeback Drifting Away

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Posts:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Likes:
    +0
    I'd rather read a monthy Joker comic than a Batman comic, given the choice. Just putting that out there.
     
  6. Spider Striker

    Spider Striker ThisGuyWithTheYellowCap

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    7,063
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    It could also be interesting to see them on the brink of victory, or even actually win, just for a bit. If they always lose, and you KNOW they're going to always loose, it can get a little dull.
     
  7. General Magnus

    General Magnus Da Custodes of the Emprah

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    12,916
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +11
    Well, it might get interesting. But we already know the goals. Kill the hero, rule the *insert thing/place here* usually with an iron fist.

    It´s also a little dull:p 
     
  8. Switchblade

    Switchblade Just a raggedy man

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Posts:
    12,905
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +33
    So... are a bunch of heroes going to take over the Secret Six book for an issue? :confused: 
     
  9. Spider Striker

    Spider Striker ThisGuyWithTheYellowCap

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2003
    Posts:
    7,063
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Well, if we're looking at it strictly from a goal and motive POV, that could be just as dull. "Save world, stop bad guys, avenge loved ones, atone for past sins, etc."

    Not disagreeing kind you. At the end of the day, the bad guy should be stopped. It's just nice to spice things up as bit every once and a while. ;) 
     
  10. swarlock

    swarlock Autobot Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Posts:
    1,565
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Likes:
    +0
    Agreed.

    While it's fine to sympathsize with a bad guy you don't want to do it too much.

    It's all about ego for them. Nothing more, nothing less.
     
  11. GW_Freak

    GW_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,835
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    It's clearly and obviously not ALWAYS ego with villains, and has been completely ignored not all villains want to RULE anything.
     
  12. Scantron

    Scantron Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Posts:
    8,249
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +3
    What's interesting about "I want to fight crime/evil"? I mean, look how many superheroes we've got fighting crime/evil. And we already know the goals: Fight crime/evil, protect [person/people/thing], make the world a better place. The hero triumphs, crime/evil is stopped, we get the point. It's been done way too often and I really wish comics would stop focusing on superheroes so much.*

    While a particular goal may be overused, I think what's important is why each character is pursuing that particular goal. Batman doesn't fight crime/evil for the same reasons as Superman or Spider-Man. Sinestro isn't trying to take over the universe for the same reason as Darkseid. For me, motivation is more interesting than the end goal. Why does this villain want to take over the world? Why are they harassing this particular hero? I don't care about villains who have a flimsy motivation, since I can't empathize with them; characters who fall into "I'm just insane" or "I'm just evil like that". In the past, there were a lot more of those villains, presumably partially because of laziness on the writer and partially because villains don't have the same time in the spotlight to explore their motivations. But writing of villains has improved and their motivations are getting more interesting, for me anyway. Looking at a character I've followed for awhile, the Cyborg Superman has gone from "I have an ill-defined mental disorder, but mostly I'm just evil for the heck of it, so I'll kill Superman" in the 90s to having a unique goal and motivation in his current appearances. I'm interested in this Villains Month idea because it might be just the thing to take some other villains from "I'm just evil, mwa-ha-ha!" to having deeper motivations and to be more interesting characters.

    Now, one reason I enjoy reading about villains specifically more than heroes is that villains are more likely to change and actually have the changes stick (with some A-list villain exceptions like Luthor or Joker, who remain static). For instance, using the GL titles as an example, does anyone really think Hal Jordan, John Stewart or Guy Gardner are going to die or suffer any permanent changes after the events of Blackest Night? Granted, Hal may be a bad example, since I have a feeling DC is especially afraid to make any change to him whatsoever after the Parallax debacle. On the other hand, someone like Cyborg Superman, Black Hand or even Sinestro could conceivably die or be irrevocably changed, since they don't have to maintain status quo on a monthly title.

    *While this is mostly intended to make a rhetorical point, it's actually part of the reason I don't read many superhero comics any more. Heroes are just as bad as villains for having weak motivations and generic goals.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2008
  13. GW_Freak

    GW_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,835
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    THIS!

    I have always been mostly a fan of Batman's Rogue's gallery. With the exception of Rhas Al Ghul, I don't believe any one of Batman's gallery of villainy could be really be said have a destroy/rule the world mindset.
     
  14. deceptifocus

    deceptifocus *Supercharged*

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Posts:
    2,272
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    Ebay:
    agreed, the entire time i was reading "Wanted" i was waiting for batman, captain america, hell even a Howard the Duck to drop in and fuck all those rapist murderers up
     
  15. General Magnus

    General Magnus Da Custodes of the Emprah

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2007
    Posts:
    12,916
    Trophy Points:
    222
    Likes:
    +11

    I see. You make a valid and interesting point. I´m afraid I didn´t explained clearly too. Yes, there are some villains I like reading, like Venom, Dr.Doom, Sinestro, etc, because they have interesting motives and reasons for what they do and more often that not, act as anti-heroes, Venom and Bane for example.

    Althought some villans get off waay to easy with the stuff they do. How many people has the Joker killed for an instance?

    Others like Darkseid and Mongul are not so interesting IMO, because, they are evil, just because, no reason whatsoever, they just want it all and have no deeper reason for being evil. Darksied, is the less interesting villain in DC. "Oh I want to dominate the entire universe, wipe out New Genesis and eliminate free will."

    Not shit? And then what, stoneface?:p 

    Princess Iolande said it best on such types of villains in the Ringquest arc:

    "Another despot with no regard for life. How new and refreshing."
     
  16. GW_Freak

    GW_Freak Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,835
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Likes:
    +0
    Not all villains need to be new and refreshing, the quest for power IS a corrupting and dangerous path. In a world where beings have the sorts of powers and abilities that you see in comic books, there will ALWAYS be beings like Darkseid. They are necessary, just as inscrutable but no less dangerous villains such as the Joker are needed.

    The Joker and Darkseid being my two favorite DC villains.
     
  17. Darkravager

    Darkravager Zombie Hunter

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,293
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +1
    I basically agree with you on this. In the same way that there are some heroes who simply are doing good for good's sake, there are those who do evil for the same reason. I would be disappointed if they got rid of villians with no motivation. Sin and evil are simply irrational and often unmotivated events. There are villians like Magneto who have powerful motivation for what they do, and are the better for it. However, there are characters like the Joker who have no motivation other than simply being evil, and he is the better for it. Like Alfred said in Dark Knight, "There are those men who simply want to see the world burn."
     

Share This Page