Do Spider-Man's villains suck?

[Agent Z]

Like people here are saying Shocker is just some dumb greedy thug who got lucky and just wants a big score, what is he then, a less interesting version of Electro?

No one is calling him that except you.

[The Overlord]

No one is calling him that except you.

That is what Alan2099 and Snoop Dogg said about him, check the previous page.

And if he is smart shouldn't be coming up with more clever crimes that robbing banks and just being hired muscle, Rhino does those things and he is supposed to be an idiot.

Unless he is a thrill seeker who wants to be on the front lines fighting heroes, in terms of pure profit, there are a ton of better ways for him to make a profit.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think if you make these characters more unique from each other (in terms of personality, rather than gimmicks) you make more compelling villains.

Like people here are saying Shocker is just some dumb greedy thug who got lucky and just wants a big score, what is he then, a less interesting version of Electro?

I think giving these villains more differentiate each other is better than not. Greedy thug is an archetype, not a character.

Like I think Shocker should be made more sympathetic and someone like Mysterio should be less sympathetic. Having some villains willing to cross that others won't is more interesting, not defining what are a character's lines are and just having them do whatever the writer feels like from story to story (ie. Shocker is supposed to be the most rational of the Spidey villains, but is okay with murdering 12 people).

If you are going to have villains who have been reoccurring since the 60s, I think you should develop them after a while, rather than trying to do the same old plot with them, over and over again, you can have a comic relief villain like White Rabbit rob banks and provide action scenes and just be there for action and a cheap laugh.

I am not saying every villain has to be a serial killer or a world conqueror (that would be silly), but I think some villains should be more murderous than others, Mysterio should not be in the same old ''greedy thug archetype'', I think he is a naturally unsympathetic character (considering his M.O is gaslighting and mind games) and should more actively unlikable compared to Shocker or Sandman. He should be more willing to resort to murder if his massive ego is bruised, while Rhino, Sandman, and Shocker would object to that and would only kill as a last resort, IMO. Have these villains not only playoff of Spidey, but have them playoff each other.

I have heard some people say Sandman was uninteresting as a hero but was he ever that interesting as a straight-up villain, no, he was just the same old greedy thug archetype. He was likely most interesting when he was criminal trying to reform. At this point, he should stay a villain, but with renounced redeeming qualities.

I don't think they're the same, though.

Mysterio ranges from being a nerd to a thug. Even when he is a thug, he is more obsessed with image than wealth or power. He also has a very theatrical personality. He has more in common with Peter when he went on TV than Peter when was out for money.

Vulture is a grandpa and family man. In Marvel Knights: Spider-Man, he only teamed up with Electro to raise money for his grandson's medical bills. He also expressed disgust with Electro objectifying women.

Electro is interesting because of his insecurities. He has the power of someone like Magneto, but acts as a thug because he can't see the big picture. In Spectacular Spider-Man, Doc Ock even exploits this and turns him into his lackey. Yes, Electro's personality is that of a generic thug, but context matters here. (Although Spectacular Spider-Man's Electro didn't have a thug personality. He was a regular college kid.)

Sandman is kinda the ultimate thug. He enjoys it the most. He loves the thrill that comes with running away from cops and fighting people. It stands out compared to other Spider-Man thugs (except for maybe Hydro-Man, who was a copy of Sandman).

Rhino is almost a parody of toxic masculinity. He is the least intelligent and most over-the-top of them all. He is also the only thug whose interactions with Spidey are fun to watch. Lastly, he is willing to team up with Spider-Man more than the other thugs. He even likes Miles Morales.

Fair point about Shocker, but Shocker was never a top Spider-Man villain. He is known, but he would barely make the top 10.

There is overlap because they are all more-or-less bullies. But I think there's differences.

[mathew101281]

I don't think they're the same, though.

Mysterio ranges from being a nerd to a thug. Even when he is a thug, he is more obsessed with image than wealth or power. He also has a very theatrical personality. He has more in common with Peter when he went on TV than Peter when was out for money.

Vulture is a grandpa and family man. In Marvel Knights: Spider-Man, he only teamed up with Electro to raise money for his grandson's medical bills. He also expressed disgust with Electro objectifying women.

Electro is interesting because of his insecurities. He has the power of someone like Magneto, but acts as a thug because he can't see the big picture. In Spectacular Spider-Man, Doc Ock even exploits this and turns him into his lackey. Yes, Electro's personality is that of a generic thug, but context matters here. (Although Spectacular Spider-Man's Electro didn't have a thug personality. He was a regular college kid.)

Sandman is kinda the ultimate thug. He enjoys it the most. He loves the thrill that comes with running away from cops and fighting people. It stands out compared to other Spider-Man thugs (except for maybe Hydro-Man, who was a copy of Sandman).

Rhino is almost a parody of toxic masculinity. He is the least intelligent and most over-the-top of them all. He is also the only thug whose interactions with Spidey are fun to watch. Lastly, he is willing to team up with Spider-Man more than the other thugs. He even likes Miles Morales.

Fair point about Shocker, but Shocker was never a top Spider-Man villain. He is known, but he would barely make the top 10.

There is overlap because they are all more-or-less bullies. But I think there's differences.

Any rogue’s gallery with more then ten villains starts to have duplicates or villains that are too similar. That’s why I always say the ideal rogue’s gallery has between 4 and 9 members. Any less and the characters run the risk of being overused, and you really can’t call it a rogue’s gallery really. (More like a hero with one or two good villains).
But any more then ten you start to have a lot of villains that are kind of similar to more popular villains that are already in the rogue’s gallery. Creators tend to gravitate towards the more well known villains, so you wind up with a bloated gallery of villains, half of which most people don’t know, and are barely used. A good example of this are the goblins and and the symbiotes. Sure they have minor differences, but to a passive bystanders they pretty much come across like “hey it’s Venom, but red and even more murdery” or what if the Green Goblin was a real demon.

[The Overlord]

I don't think they're the same, though.

Mysterio ranges from being a nerd to a thug. Even when he is a thug, he is more obsessed with image than wealth or power. He also has a very theatrical personality. He has more in common with Peter when he went on TV than Peter when was out for money.

Vulture is a grandpa and family man. In Marvel Knights: Spider-Man, he only teamed up with Electro to raise money for his grandson's medical bills. He also expressed disgust with Electro objectifying women.

Electro is interesting because of his insecurities. He has the power of someone like Magneto, but acts as a thug because he can't see the big picture. In Spectacular Spider-Man, Doc Ock even exploits this and turns him into his lackey. Yes, Electro's personality is that of a generic thug, but context matters here. (Although Spectacular Spider-Man's Electro didn't have a thug personality. He was a regular college kid.)

Sandman is kinda the ultimate thug. He enjoys it the most. He loves the thrill that comes with running away from cops and fighting people. It stands out compared to other Spider-Man thugs (except for maybe Hydro-Man, who was a copy of Sandman).

Rhino is almost a parody of toxic masculinity. He is the least intelligent and most over-the-top of them all. He is also the only thug whose interactions with Spidey are fun to watch. Lastly, he is willing to team up with Spider-Man more than the other thugs. He even likes Miles Morales.

Fair point about Shocker, but Shocker was never a top Spider-Man villain. He is known, but he would barely make the top 10.

There is overlap because they are all more-or-less bullies. But I think there's differences.

I do like most of these villains, but I do think writing them consistently helps.

There have been some times where Mysterio was driven solely by profit (like the fake nursing home), but he is less interested when he is driven by greed, rather than fame and something like Guardian Devil is canon, where Mysterio was very murderous.

Like I disagree that Sandman is the ''ultimate thug'' because he was one of the few Spidey villains who reformed and I think if he remains a criminal, he should have redeeming qualities that reflect that. Thug is not a character, its an archetype.

Rhino has been fleshed out somewhat recently, where he had a wife who was killed a copycat Rhino and became bitter about it, which is pretty interesting. Rhino can still be a thug, but maybe he shouldn't be cartoonishly stupid.

Electro's self-esteem issues can be lost in the shuffle, but its at least an interesting thing that writers can use, so I like that addition to the character.

See people here think I hate Shocker, but that is not the case, I just think a villain who is more of a professional than the others could be super interesting if the writers and fans demanded more from the character and gave him a real defining story, where we see the inner workings of the character.

I have grown to like Vulture, sure sometimes he is still a generic villain and I did not care for his gimmick, but the writers do give him a solid effort a lot of the time.

I think my big thing, is to make Mysterio more actively unsympathetic and make Shocker actively more sympathetic.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

Any rogue’s gallery with more then ten villains starts to have duplicates or villains that are too similar. That’s why I always say the ideal rogue’s gallery has between 4 and 9 members. Any less and the characters run the risk of being overused, and you really can’t call it a rogue’s gallery really. (More like a hero with one or two good villains).
But any more then ten you start to have a lot of villains that are kind of similar to more popular villains that are already in the rogue’s gallery. Creators tend to gravitate towards the more well known villains, so you wind up with a bloated gallery of villains, half of which most people don’t know, and are barely used. A good example of this are the goblins and and the symbiotes. Sure they have minor differences, but to a passive bystanders they pretty much come across like “hey it’s Venom, but red and even more murdery” or what if the Green Goblin was a real demon.

I disagree. I don't think there can be a cap on anything to do with creativity. I mean, some villains will obviously be more relevant to the hero than others. No one will dethrone Green Goblin and Doc Ock, for example. Still, you can have an infinite amount of "good" villains.

I do like most of these villains, but I do think writing them consistently helps.

There have been some times where Mysterio was driven solely by profit (like the fake nursing home), but he is less interested when he is driven by greed, rather than fame and something like Guardian Devil is canon, where Mysterio was very murderous.

Like I disagree that Sandman is the ''ultimate thug'' because he was one of the few Spidey villains who reformed and I think if he remains a criminal, he should have redeeming qualities that reflect that. Thug is not a character, its an archetype.

Rhino has been fleshed out somewhat recently, where he had a wife who was killed a copycat Rhino and became bitter about it, which is pretty interesting. Rhino can still be a thug, but maybe he shouldn't be cartoonishly stupid.

Electro's self-esteem issues can be lost in the shuffle, but its at least an interesting thing that writers can use, so I like that addition to the character.

See people here think I hate Shocker, but that is not the case, I just think a villain who is more of a professional than the others could be super interesting if the writers and fans demanded more from the character and gave him a real defining story, where we see the inner workings of the character.

I have grown to like Vulture, sure sometimes he is still a generic villain and I did not care for his gimmick, but the writers do give him a solid effort a lot of the time.

I think my big thing, is to make Mysterio more actively unsympathetic and make Shocker actively more sympathetic.

I was speaking of Sandman from his villain days. He was always the quintessential thug going back to the Lee/Ditko era. I don't think he was that interesting as a hero.

Rhino is a part-parody of thugs in the same way Spider-Man started out as part-parody of superheroes. Not all parodies are cartoonish or can't be taken seriously.

What's also interesting about Electro is he had the most in common with Peter in the Lee/Ditko run (not counting GG and Doc Ock). He was a blue-collar worker like Uncle Ben. He would refuse to help people without being payed, kinda like Peter in Amazing Fantasy #15. Then when he gets his powers, he builds a body device to help him control his electricity (kinda like Peter's webshooters). Amazing Spider-Man #9 is one of my favorite Electro stories of all time.

Agreed that Shocker could be more interesting.

[SpideyCeo]

Is Harry Osborn part of Spider-Man's regular recurring rogues gallery? No. Has anyone actually considered Jameson a villain and part of Spider-Man's rogues? No. So neither count.

Harry Osborn's biggest story as a villain, Best of Enemies is about him being a self-destructive tragic friend in a depressive spiral and not really a villain, considering he dies at the end. And his biggest jerk move as a villain, the Robotparents thing, was posthumous (shades of Ned Leeds) and not considered a good story.

Clash is another recent exception and still early days to say, and he's ultra-obscure. It doesn't disprove or invalidate my point that most of Spider-Man's rogues and his classic are older men.



I don't have a problem with the villains being white, I have a problem with it being used or explained as "New York is diverse".

I like the fact that in Spider-Man, you have African-American characters like Robbie Robertson and Hobie Brown who are shown as genuine decent people with Hobie Brown being a criminal who reformed and stayed reformed. A fact that Bendis respected by making Ultimate Prowler a different character, Aaron Davis, rather than Ultimate Hobie.

But in any case my point is that these villains lack range and coherence. There's not a lot of consistency in characterization, theme, costume, powers, and neither of them fit the setting of New York.

Huh, if only you knew man. Lets say, theyre a picture of robbie and mj that makes me lose hope for the world and those characters.

[SpideyCeo]

As a character, no. The mugger was a one and done rando. It could be any other thug and it would still work. There was nothing intrinsic that the story work with that mugger specifically.

In general, most Spider-Man villains would be villains with or without Spider-Man. With or without Spider-Man, Dr. Octopus would be Dr. Octopus, Norman would be Goblin, Max Dillon would be Electro, Toomes would be Vulture, Sandman would be Sandman, Connors would be Lizard, Beck would be Mysterio and Kraven would be Kraven.

Examples of villains who are unintended consequences of Spider-Man's actions are Scorpion (a PI hired by Jameson out of his hatred for Spider-Man later made into a villain), the Spider-Slayer (Smythe's robot concept that Peter unthinkingly convinced Jameson would be a good idea as part of what Peter thought would be a joke), Venom and Carnage, as a result of the symbiote Peter brought back to earth.

You could say the same for villainsnofnbatman whonstray off being just batmans problem to major principle figures in villain groups or just plain main character factions that are seen as threata and revered allies and equals to the big league heroes, villains or neutral sides. Spideys baddie outside of venom and black cat are jokes to other top tier hero teams and villain teams.

[SpideyCeo]

A strong no. Spider-Man has rogues that are just iconic.

No there not.

[Toxin45]

You could say the same for villainsnofnbatman whonstray off being just batmans problem to major principle figures in villain groups or just plain main character factions that are seen as threata and revered allies and equals to the big league heroes, villains or neutral sides. Spideys baddie outside of venom and black cat are jokes to other top tier hero teams and villain teams.

You forgot Norman osborn the green goblin and doc ock.

[mathew101281]

No there not.

Venom, isn't iconic then? how about the Green Goblin? Doc Oc is pretty well known as well. If those aren't iconic wonder what you consider iconic to mean.