Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23
  1. #1
    Astonishing Member mathew101281's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,177

    Default Interesting antagonists turn interesting superheroes into interesting franchises

    If you look at a list of the most consistently popular superheroes, a pattern arises. Good rogue’s gallery. Heroes with bad rogue’s gallery’s can pop up and become popular for a time, but they eventually seem to fade eventually. I feel it’s because superheroes tend to be quite static once you establish a certain status quo for them. It’s the villains that add flavor to the story. A Riddler story is very different from a Scarecrow story which is very different from a Joker or Two-Face story.

    The problem with heroes that have weak rogue’s galleries is that All their stories tend to start feeling similar.

  2. #2
    Astonishing Member LordMikel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,471

    Default

    I would agree with this.

    Batgirl in the past years has been given Calculator as a good nemesis. Which I think bumped that villain higher as well.
    In comparison to the Scarlet witch series a few years back, which had her wandering from place to place fighting unknown villain 1 and then 2, etc.
    I think restorative nostalgia is the number one issue with comic book fans.
    A fine distinction between two types of Nostalgia:

    Reflective Nostalgia allows us to savor our memories but accepts that they are in the past
    Restorative Nostalgia pushes back against the here and now, keeping us stuck trying to relive our glory days.

  3. #3
    Extraordinary Member Lightning Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,911

    Default

    I think you're right. I don't think it's a rule that had to do with the original success of the genre, but it has clearly transformed and sustained the life of a variety of heroes.

    If you look at what separates the A tier of the Justice League and (still important but clearly lesser) B tier, the A list has iconic villains, while the B team does not.

    Hawkman, the Atom, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Firestorm, Black Lightning, Vixen, arguably even Martian Manhunter.

    That's not to say they don't have quality villains...but they have yet to have a definitive, ground-breaking, or attention-grabbing impact.

  4. #4
    Astonishing Member mathew101281's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,177

    Default

    I’d argue this is why so many of the marvel movies feel interchangeable as well. The villains often feel generic and ill defined.

  5. #5
    Astonishing Member MoneySpider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lightning Rider View Post
    I think you're right. I don't think it's a rule that had to do with the original success of the genre, but it has clearly transformed and sustained the life of a variety of heroes.

    If you look at what separates the A tier of the Justice League and (still important but clearly lesser) B tier, the A list has iconic villains, while the B team does not.

    Hawkman, the Atom, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Firestorm, Black Lightning, Vixen, arguably even Martian Manhunter.

    That's not to say they don't have quality villains...but they have yet to have a definitive, ground-breaking, or attention-grabbing impact.
    Well, in Vixen's case, she's NEVER had an ongoing solo book of her own, and the last time they TRIED to give her one was back in 1978. She's had a mini-series, but there's only so much of a Rogues Gallery you can give her in a 5-issue mini-series. And any time she's in a team book, she can have arcs focusing on her, but there again there is not enough time or enough room to give her a Rogues Gallery because that's not a solo book for her.

    If she was given a chance at a solo book, things might be different, but my stance is Vixen won't have a true Rogues Gallery that people will come to know until she is given the opportunity to headline/star in her own solo book.

    And I blame DC for this, because they've had 42 years to try and give Vixen a solo and have yet to do it. And I think Vixen has yet to have 'definitive, ground-breaking, or attention-grabbing impact" because DC has purposely ignored her and has denied her opportunities that they've given other characters, DESPITE the many "hooks" she has as a character.
    Last edited by MoneySpider; 11-11-2020 at 05:17 PM.
    Black Panther - Champion of Bast
    Vixen - Champion of Anansi

  6. #6
    Extraordinary Member Restingvoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    9,574

    Default

    That's definitely Batman and Spider-Man, yeah.

  7. #7
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    752

    Default

    I agree and disagree with you at the same time. I agree because we can see from the current hold up that Superheroes like Spider-Man, Batman, and Flash have a very consistent or in a way more consistent than their peers because they have a good rogue villains as a way to support their stories. It's not really a stretch that even telling that Batman and Flash is nothing without their villains. But, the case is not true to Daredevil, Spider-Man, Hulk, and Thor. Spider-Man had a great rogues, but what made his comic interesting to read is Peter Parker story. The same can be said with Hulk, Daredevil, and Thor. Heck even Norrin Radd is really interesting even without great villains.

    I think the notion that Superhero is interesting because of the great rogue is true. They made the story more interesting with how they presented themselves as the villains. But, on the side sometimes Superhero don't need them to become interesting. I think it all come to DC history that starts up as a honest-to-good Superhero story and Marvel that starts up as a Superhero story with Soap Opera trajectory that help Superhero stand alone without even interesting villains backing them up.

  8. #8
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    54

    Default

    You could argue that is the case for every drama, since whenever there is struggle there is a protagonist and a antagonist. I'd argue Superheroes are not inherently more reliant on their villains than any other genre, and i think the idea that the first step in making a new hero franchise is building a villain galery from scratch is a grave mistake, because what's important is the protagonists' struggle, rather than admiring the coolness of the antagonist. Rather than a necessary key for a longstanding franchise, having a good villains' gallery is the result of good writers writing interesting struggles,

    There have been plenty of good Batman, Superman or wonder woman stories that don't involve villains at all.

  9. #9
    Astonishing Member Stanlos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    4,167

    Default

    The hero has always been the point of interest for me. Not the villain.

    In fact, it doesn't even have to have a baddie. Batman is famous for his rogues but I find them to be more than a bit silly and contrived to the point of ruining the suspension of disbelief. To each their own though.

  10. #10
    Astonishing Member Tzigone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    3,748

    Default

    I'd argue Superheroes are not inherently more reliant on their villains than any other genre, and i think the idea that the first step in making a new hero franchise is building a villain galery from scratch is a grave mistake, because what's important is the protagonists' struggle, rather than admiring the coolness of the antagonist. Rather than a necessary key for a longstanding franchise, having a good villains' gallery is the result of good writers writing interesting struggles,
    To a degree. I certainly don't care much about villains, but I've read many a message board post/article where someone talks about a favorite comic book because of the villains being so cool (FF fighting Doctor Doom instead of Thor fighting commie spies). To me, a villain is just something for a hero to overcome, most of the time. I, personally, love a supporting cast, and get as attached to them as the heroes, often enough.

    I do think good villains help for a lot of people, though.

    I think the biggest mistake in creating new comic book characters (ever since the shift to arc-based stories) may be creating the character for the story instead of the stories for the character. When everything about the character (hero or villain or supporting character) is designed for accomplising that first arc....and then there's nothing to do with them afterwards. Or nothing that can top that first arc where every character was designed for the place in the story. I think characters - heroes, villains, and supporting cast, need to created with a thought towards reusability and versatility. Towards being interesting or fun always instead of having only one story in them. Because that story is going to end. Now that works well for a close-ended medium. It can even work well for a villain or supporting character - as long as writers are willing to let them go after the story (and as long as readers won't move on after they are gone). Bad move for a hero, though. You too often end up with one great story, and then nothing else works nearly as well afterwards. Worse yet, when they keep retelling that story over and over.
    Last edited by Tzigone; 11-11-2020 at 05:56 PM.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Restingvoice View Post
    That's definitely Batman and Spider-Man, yeah.
    I would add Daredevil too.
    december 21st has passed where are my superpowers?

  12. #12
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    15,236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lightning Rider View Post
    I think you're right. I don't think it's a rule that had to do with the original success of the genre, but it has clearly transformed and sustained the life of a variety of heroes.

    If you look at what separates the A tier of the Justice League and (still important but clearly lesser) B tier, the A list has iconic villains, while the B team does not.

    Hawkman, the Atom, Green Arrow, Black Canary, Firestorm, Black Lightning, Vixen, arguably even Martian Manhunter.

    That's not to say they don't have quality villains...but they have yet to have a definitive, ground-breaking, or attention-grabbing impact.
    Vixen never held a solo.

    A lot of those villains for the rest most did not get used anywhere else. Unless they ended up fodder in Suicide Squad or in BL's case Tony Isabella issues.

    Now we do have exceptions.

    Killer Frost is Firestorm villain. She has done MORE than CHeetah from Wonder Woman.

    A lot of the Flash villains were jokes. Then came Johns.

  13. #13
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    4,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tzigone View Post
    To a degree. I certainly don't care much about villains, but I've read many a message board post/article where someone talks about a favorite comic book because of the villains being so cool (FF fighting Doctor Doom instead of Thor fighting commie spies). To me, a villain is just something for a hero to overcome, most of the time. I, personally, love a supporting cast, and get as attached to them as the heroes, often enough.

    I do think good villains help for a lot of people, though.

    I think the biggest mistake in creating new comic book characters (ever since the shift to arc-based stories) may be creating the character for the story instead of the stories for the character. When everything about the character (hero or villain or supporting character) is designed for accomplising that first arc....and then there's nothing to do with them afterwards. Or nothing that can top that first arc where every character was designed for the place in the story. I think characters - heroes, villains, and supporting cast, need to created with a thought towards reusability and versatility. Towards being interesting or fun always instead of having only one story in them. Because that story is going to end. Now that works well for a close-ended medium. It can even work well for a villain or supporting character - as long as writers are willing to let them go after the story (and as long as readers won't move on after they are gone). Bad move for a hero, though. You too often end up with one great story, and then nothing else works nearly as well afterwards. Worse yet, when they keep retelling that story over and over.
    I don't think villains need to be created with the idea of reusability. Once a character's story arc is done, the character should move on in some form. It's more that it's hard for us (or the writers) to let go of old characters.

    Time literally has to stop or else everyone will realize that absolutey zero progress has been made with their goals.

  14. #14
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lgcruz View Post
    You could argue that is the case for every drama, since whenever there is struggle there is a protagonist and a antagonist. I'd argue Superheroes are not inherently more reliant on their villains than any other genre, and i think the idea that the first step in making a new hero franchise is building a villain galery from scratch is a grave mistake, because what's important is the protagonists' struggle, rather than admiring the coolness of the antagonist. Rather than a necessary key for a longstanding franchise, having a good villains' gallery is the result of good writers writing interesting struggles,

    There have been plenty of good Batman, Superman or wonder woman stories that don't involve villains at all.
    I agree with this, no matter how cool the villain is the main selling of a story such as Superheroes comic is the protagonist struggle against antagonist. It doesn't have to be struggle against villains, but themself and people around them. I think because of that the reason why Daredevil can strive is because despite he only had three villains that can be considered classic, he is still one of the best and most consistent comic or franchise in general. Because he doesn't really need stellar villains to work, he can work by himself. Daredevil or in case Matt Murdock conflict internal is more interesting than his fight against Kingpin and Bullseye combined.

  15. #15
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OopsIdiditagain View Post
    I would add Daredevil too.
    OP characters make me itch, your avatar is Miss Asspull /s.

Posting Permissions

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