Page 1 of 17 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 246
  1. #1
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    324

    Default Do Spider-Man's villains suck?

    I personally think they start getting bad as returning foes to a ongoing hero like Peter who's character is about becoming more mature and adult from defeating them. Characters like Mysterio, Kraven, Rhino, Electro and Sandman are losers with no consistantacy in being true threats to Peter with out Peter suffering pis due to them taking a back seat to peters narrative of fix his normal activities and spiderman activities. Villains should define the hero as a aspect of the heroes power to morally succeed, the more the hero progresses his character, the more they should perform great feats of villainy, with larger objectives other than taking over new York or getting revenge. It shows they too can become developed characters that grow into bigger picture villains like doom. Most of Spider's big villains act as actual rivals than evil threats to innocents and Peter. I really hate Peter being such a victim of terrible writting when he struggles with villains like Mysterio or Kraven, its.like he forgot he a legendary veteran badass who can overpower these two and has genius level skils and experience taking them down. A villain that lame shouldn't be able to go into other books and become a threat to other heroes and villains, that's pis, Peter has got to have the most inconsistent villain threats in fiction because thanks to the setting and the self contained nature of the books, Spidey villains really feel incapable of being taken seriously when the hero does more outlandish feats of heroism outside the main title, and I am supposed to believe characters like morbius and Kraven can take on Peter and has issues taking them on?

    Note I make it a rule, that if villains face off and lose to characters like deadpool and wolverine who humiliate someome like Kraven or Shocker more than once, while being written to somehow to fight equally with Spider-man or Cap in another comic, they are poorly written.
    Last edited by SpideyCeo; 02-20-2019 at 03:29 PM.

  2. #2
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    What the heck is this thread?

    No, Spider-Man's villains don't suck. They're well written and just as human as he is. Even the B-list like Electro, Sandman, Vulture, Mysterio, and more have more depth to them than most other supervillains in any company. Regarding Spidey losing to them...that's just what happens sometimes, hence why they're recurring villains.
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  3. #3

    Default

    Spider-Man's villains suck because Spider-Man's stories aren't about them. This isn't Batman where the hero's main relationships are with his bad guys. Spider-Man is about Peter and his supporting cast, and the villains fit in that milieu.

    So by design and function, Spider-Man's villains aren't all that impressive when you look deep or do head-to-head comparisons.

    When you think of Marvel Comics' greatest villains: Doctor Doom, Galactus, Magneto, Thanos, Kang the Conqueror, Ultron, Red Skull, Loki...none of them are Spider-Man villains.

  4. #4
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Spider-Man's villains suck because Spider-Man's stories aren't about them. This isn't Batman where the hero's main relationships are with his bad guys. Spider-Man is about Peter and his supporting cast, and the villains fit in that milieu.

    So by design and function, Spider-Man's villains aren't all that impressive when you look deep or do head-to-head comparisons.

    When you think of Marvel Comics' greatest villains: Doctor Doom, Galactus, Magneto, Thanos, Kang the Conqueror, Ultron, Red Skull, Loki...none of them are Spider-Man villains.
    Umm... that doesn't mean his villains suck though. They're not on the world stage of the Marvel Universe in terms of feats. And in my opinion, they don't need to.
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  5. #5
    Fantastic Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebSlingWonder View Post
    What the heck is this thread?

    No, Spider-Man's villains don't suck. They're well written and just as human as he is. Even the B-list like Electro, Sandman, Vulture, Mysterio, and more have more depth to them than most other supervillains in any company. Regarding Spidey losing to them...that's just what happens sometimes, hence why they're recurring villains.
    then why aren't they as popular as x-men villains? Even the spidey a lister villains and anti heroes dont compare to most of the xmen a lister villains and anti heroes. Magneto > Norman in being a complex villain.
    Last edited by SpideyCeo; 02-20-2019 at 03:23 PM.

  6. #6
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpideyCeo View Post
    then why aren't they as popular as x-men villains?
    Because the X-Men and their villains are cut from similar cloths. When the team was popular, so were the villains by default. And the show and movies didn't hurt either. But I guarantee you that the average person can't tell you anymore about the X-Villains besides the usual ones: Magneto, Sabretooth, Mystique, Stryker, Apocalypse. But you can bet someone knows about the Spider-Man villains beyond the big three.
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  7. #7
    Kinky Lil' Canine Snoop Dogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    4,514

    Default

    Spider-Man has the best rogues gallery in comics, except Electro, who is dead, and a couple other wack guys, who are dead. Even if they're not the Marvel Universe's biggest issues, they're not supposed to be because the MU does not orbit around Spider-Man, they're still dangerous and effective, and they're actual fleshed out characters with goals and motivations. They have compelling designs, diverse abilities, and are the backbones of countless great stories. Their own stories are just as interesting to keep up with as the hero's. Obviously Marvel has many other villains like this, but Spider-Man has a little monopoly all to himself.

    Also, X-Men villains are usually wack, except for Magneto, who is many times not a villain.
    Last edited by Snoop Dogg; 02-20-2019 at 03:28 PM.
    heroine addict we love you come back

  8. #8
    Astonishing Member Celgress's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,854

    Default

    I prefer Batman's rogues gallery (by a hair) but that's just me. Spider-Man, IMO, has the second best rogues gallery in all of comics no contest. I don't understand how anyone coukld say they suck because they don't.
    "I'm sorry, but your story isn't adding up. I think your religion is a lie to keep my mouth shut."

  9. #9
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoop Dogg View Post
    Spider-Man has the best rogues gallery in comics, except Electro, who is dead, and a couple other wack guys, who are dead. Even if they're not the Marvel Universe's biggest issues, they're not supposed to be because the MU does not orbit around Spider-Man, they're still dangerous and effective, and they're actual fleshed out characters with goals and motivations. They have compelling designs, diverse abilities, and are the backbones of countless great stories. Their own stories are just as interesting to keep up with as the hero's. Obviously Marvel has many other villains like this, but Spider-Man has a little monopoly all to himself.

    Also, X-Men villains are usually wack, except for Magneto, who is many times not a villain.
    Quote Originally Posted by Celgress View Post
    I prefer Batman's rogues gallery (by a hair) but that's just me. Spider-Man, IMO, has the second best rogues gallery in all of comics no contest. I don't understand how anyone coukld say they suck because they don't.
    I agree with both of these.

    (Except that Batman one lol I like Batman too)
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  10. #10
    All-New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Agree with those in favor of Spider-Man's villains. Also, if Spidey is able to learn from these fights and gain more skills doesn't it stand to reason that the villains would too? Mysterio alone has ramped up his game big time over the years. To the point where he can even fool the heightened senses of Wolverine and Daredevil.

  11. #11

    Default

    One doesn't really need a great rogues gallery to be an interesting hero and character. It's more a question of design and the kind of stories you are telling. Superman doesn't have many good villains and Spider-Man villains are on the whole better than his. Everyone thinks Lex Luthor is a great villain for instance but Dr. Doom is better than him, and Modern Lex is basically a copy of Doom and Kingpin. Superman's most interesting villains are Brainiac, Bizarro, and my favorite Mr. Mxyzsptlk, and of course more recently Darkseid has become a Superman villain. But for a variety of reasons, those characters tend not to be used too much because they take Superman away from his street-level civilian setting and Luthor as a whole fits that main corner of Superman more consistently than these other characters who are best for specific arcs, so that makes Luthor Superman's arch enemy even if on the whole he's not a very well-written character, and certainly never conceived to be the arch enemy. It was what worked best for Superman. Superman's stories aren't about his bad guys, it's about him, his family, his friends, Lois Lane, and his longing for Krypton and navigating and balancing his two identities. Fundamentally, Spider-Man is just like Superman in that regard. His story is not about him and the bad guys.

    Spider-Man has an unique and interesting Rogues Gallery in terms of powers, costumes, and design, but not by personality and depth. They aren't as thematically rich as other villains. Like in Batman, when you do a Scarecrow story you can talk about fears and inner demons, and at least pontificate a bit about psychology. And unlike Spider-Man who doesn't have a single compelling female villain, Batman has many like Poison Ivy, Talia al Ghul, Lady Shiva. The reason Batman's rogues gallery is so much better and interesting is that for the longest time, Batman sucked as a character. People read the comics mostly because the villains were cooler and interesting, and the subtext of Batman has always been that you secretly root for the villains to get one over the spoiled rich kid bore who is the Commissioner's little lapdog. Adam West's BATMAN and Tim Burton's first Batman films are entirely about that. When they made Batman a more complex character, they basically invented the idea that these villains are dark reflections of Batman's personality and Batman is an inch away from becoming as bad if not worse, and that basically meant that Batman's relationships with his rogues is far more important than his relationships and connections with his supporting cast who he mostly treats like s--t.

    That's also true for the Fantastic Four who as many will note are often less interesting than the world-building they are part of. There's no question that Dr. Doom is just more interesting than Reed Richards and even the Fantastic Four put together, but Reed and Doom have the greatest rivalry and Reed being this straight, boring, character is important. He's not the flamboyant, charismatic one. If you try and make Reed interesting as both the mess of the fantastic four movies try and do, you end up destroying the function and dynamic of those characters. Not all heroes and all villains are supposed to be cool tortured ones. Some villains exist just to make the hero look good. Most of Spider-Man's bad guys serve that function. They exist to complicate and mess his life up, to give him some victory or defeat to balance his personal wins/losses, but they aren't interesting by themselves.

  12. #12
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MP95 View Post
    Agree with those in favor of Spider-Man's villains. Also, if Spidey is able to learn from these fights and gain more skills doesn't it stand to reason that the villains would too? Mysterio alone has ramped up his game big time over the years. To the point where he can even fool the heightened senses of Wolverine and Daredevil.
    Right?! That alone upgrades him. Kraven too, taking on Scarlet Spider, Old Man Logan, and Captain America. And freaking Rhino took on the Hulk and lived!
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  13. #13
    Spider-Fan Since '95 WebSlingWonder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    599

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    One doesn't really need a great rogues gallery to be an interesting hero and character. It's more a question of design and the kind of stories you are telling. Superman doesn't have many good villains and Spider-Man villains are on the whole better than his. Everyone thinks Lex Luthor is a great villain for instance but Dr. Doom is better than him, and Modern Lex is basically a copy of Doom and Kingpin. Superman's most interesting villains are Brainiac, Bizarro, and my favorite Mr. Mxyzsptlk, and of course more recently Darkseid has become a Superman villain. But for a variety of reasons, those characters tend not to be used too much because they take Superman away from his street-level civilian setting and Luthor as a whole fits that main corner of Superman more consistently than these other characters who are best for specific arcs, so that makes Luthor Superman's arch enemy even if on the whole he's not a very well-written character, and certainly never conceived to be the arch enemy. It was what worked best for Superman. Superman's stories aren't about his bad guys, it's about him, his family, his friends, Lois Lane, and his longing for Krypton and navigating and balancing his two identities. Fundamentally, Spider-Man is just like Superman in that regard. His story is not about him and the bad guys.

    Spider-Man has an unique and interesting Rogues Gallery in terms of powers, costumes, and design, but not by personality and depth. They aren't as thematically rich as other villains. Like in Batman, when you do a Scarecrow story you can talk about fears and inner demons, and at least pontificate a bit about psychology. And unlike Spider-Man who doesn't have a single compelling female villain, Batman has many like Poison Ivy, Talia al Ghul, Lady Shiva. The reason Batman's rogues gallery is so much better and interesting is that for the longest time, Batman sucked as a character. People read the comics mostly because the villains were cooler and interesting, and the subtext of Batman has always been that you secretly root for the villains to get one over the spoiled rich kid bore who is the Commissioner's little lapdog. Adam West's BATMAN and Tim Burton's first Batman films are entirely about that. When they made Batman a more complex character, they basically invented the idea that these villains are dark reflections of Batman's personality and Batman is an inch away from becoming as bad if not worse, and that basically meant that Batman's relationships with his rogues is far more important than his relationships and connections with his supporting cast who he mostly treats like s--t.

    That's also true for the Fantastic Four who as many will note are often less interesting than the world-building they are part of. There's no question that Dr. Doom is just more interesting than Reed Richards and even the Fantastic Four put together, but Reed and Doom have the greatest rivalry and Reed being this straight, boring, character is important. He's not the flamboyant, charismatic one. If you try and make Reed interesting as both the mess of the fantastic four movies try and do, you end up destroying the function and dynamic of those characters. Not all heroes and all villains are supposed to be cool tortured ones. Some villains exist just to make the hero look good. Most of Spider-Man's bad guys serve that function. They exist to complicate and mess his life up, to give him some victory or defeat to balance his personal wins/losses, but they aren't interesting by themselves.
    Okay, no. This isn't true in the slightest.
    I know we've all read Spider-Man comics on here, so I don't have to bring up countless examples of stories where the Spider-villains actually have depth with and without Spider-Man.
    The Amazing, Spectacular, Sensational Web-Slinger!

  14. #14
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    6,699

    Default

    Spider-Man has, arguably, the best rogue gallery in comics.

    At the very least, they're in a very tight race with Batman, The Flash and the FF's rogues.

    Who the hell would ever ask if they suck? 'Cause clearly they don't.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebSlingWonder View Post
    Okay, no. This isn't true in the slightest.
    I know we've all read Spider-Man comics on here, so I don't have to bring up countless examples of stories where the Spider-villains actually have depth with and without Spider-Man.
    A lot of people have noted that Spider-Man villains tend not to be too interesting. Ta-Nehisi Coates pointed this out once when he asked how come Spider-Man's villains aren't all that good compared to Batman's.

    In the movies, every Spider-Man rogue ends up knowing Peter's identity and/or become versions of Norman Osborn, one reason could be is that they're lazy and that Thanksgiving scene in Spider-Man 1 was this moment that every Sony producer became fixated on. The other reason is that the villains aren't all that deep. Dr. Octopus for instance is a thug-in-labcoat for the majority of his stories. Neither Ditko, nor Lee ever intended to be sympathetic. This idea that Dr. Octopus is Peter if he went dark is something, or a subtitute Dad figure that Spider-Man 2 and the PS4 game do is just not the character as conceived. This was an idea that Tom Defalco and others who came after took, and it's a very Batman-idea for a villain characterization. The problem is that its redundant. Peter doesn't need to be warned that he could end up becoming a villain. Him letting the burglar go already showed him and proved things to him about what he would do if he doesn't use his powers for good. The best stories with Dr. Octopus like The Master Planner or The Owl/Octopus War is about Octopus being this dumb moronic villain threat who Peter after messing and fudging around, finally gets his s--t together and kicks his ass royally. That's what Dr. Octopus is about. That's also what most of Spider-Man villains' are about. That's also why Nothing Can Stop the Juggernaut is this great story, and that has Spider-Man going against someone out of his wheelhouse.

    Norman Osborn/Green Goblin is different. But on the whole he's a mix of Luthor/Joker with a bit of Ra's Al Ghul thrown in (the whole coming back from the dead thing). He's a villain on a significantly higher level than others and genuinely dangerous and scary when done right.

    In general, in the case of Batman, the Fantastic Four, and for that matter even the X-Men in some stories, you can argue that the Joker, Dr. Doom, and Magneto are more interesting than the heroes. But in no way are any of Spider-Man's villains more interesting or complex as characters than Peter, J. Jonah Jameson, and Mary Jane Watson, or Aunt May, or even Flash Thompson. That's by purpose and design.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •