What Villains Could Carry Their Own Films?

[Tracer Bullet]

The Brotherhood of Mutants. Set up as something like an anti X-Men. A ragtag group bent on taking down a world that hates and fears them.

[Mockingbird]

Taskmaster.

Funny, oddly tragic, with plenty of fight scenes.

[Raye]

You need a villain that is at least a little sympathetic, and really build on those qualities, and they also should probably be fairly well known. So I think probably Loki, and Magneto... I'd say Doom as well, but that's only based on the version in the comics. Given what we have heard about Doom in the new Fantastic Four movie... no.

[Post Monster]

It helps if the villain is a victim with some legitimate issue that he audience can sympathize with beyond the villainous agenda. Magneto and Loki are both broken characters who react based on past trauma, and both have lots of humanizing moments that let readers see them as people. Any villain Marvel has developed enough to make them a person and not just monsters to be beaten would work.

[Post Monster]

Does High Evolutionary even count as a villain? Because being fatherly to Warlock is just unspeakably adorable for this guy. We need more of it.

[Ascended]

The sad thing, I think, is that most of the best villains are held by other studios. Doom, Magneto, Namor, they'd all make for great movies but Marvel doesnt own the rights.

I think Ronan could work. The Guardians of the Galaxy movie made him out to be a pretty disappointing, one-note bad guy, but in the comics he's developed into a pretty interesting character with some nuance. I think, with the right approach and villain who is far worse than he, (maybe the Skrulls?) Ronan could work as a movie headliner.

Beyond that it gets pretty vague. Taskmaster....maybe? I dont know a *ton* about him but he doesnt seem to have the sympathetic angle, he mostly seems to be a black hearted mercenary with a rough origin story.

I was actually thinking that an AIM movie could be a lot of fun. The "hero" could be a new recruit who doesnt realize how evil the organization is, gets in too deep too fast, and then tries to get out. MODOK could serve as the main antagonist. Maybe have Coulson show up at the end to bring the guy into SHIELD. I dunno, but with the X-Men and FF bad guys claimed by other studios Marvel doesnt have a lot to pick from, other than Loki.

[Raye]

Ha ha. Now that's a villain.



Hmmmm. I don't think the villain is the star of horror movies necessarily, at times perhaps but usually the star is the person overcoming said villain. The underlying point to horror films is overcoming evil, at least that should be imo. The villain might get a lot of screen time but that doesn't specifically make them the star, however i admit the lines are a bit blurred in this example as the perspective isn't as clear and some people will raise the villain up as the star nevertheless.

If someone goes in to a Nightmare on Elm Street movie to cheer on and connect with Freddy... that's pretty messed up. "It's" the evil to be overcome. [Usually by the heroine]

It is my belief, "the darker the villain the brighter the hero" since they represent duality to the hero... the most vile and evil villain is duality to the most good and pure hero... by blurring the lines with all of these anti-heroes instead of villains it takes away from the heroes, and i don't believe it to be a coincidence that many of the heroes at the moment aren't shining brightly as heroes should shine bright, as a result.

Giving villains their own movies would just be a continuation to this end, most likely they would need to take on some anti-hero qualities as i don't think a lot of people would go to the movies to see a villain doing his, her or it's villainy throughout the movie [if it be true evil villainy] and for evil to win in the end, and this would result in more and more fading of duality and the light.

As to Loki, is he even a villain at this stage? I'd consider him an anti-hero or at least chaotic neutral in the same league as say Namor.

Just saw this. And i don't think that's necessarily true, I mean, Magneto has been portrayed as a deep and sympathetic for decades now, he hops back and forth over the line from anti-villain to anti-hero all the time (and sometimes into outright villain, but that sympathetic backstory does help soften him even at his worst). But I don't think his gray nature has diminished the X-Men, I think the fact that his and Xavier's ideals are separated by very little is part of the appeal of the franchise. Also, I just plain don't think all superhero comics should be about good vs evil. I mean, that can work, I think some villains should stay villains to the core, like Red Skull. But I don't want to read/watch the same types of characters duking it out all the time, variety is good, and you get that variety by making them well rounded characters. And when it comes to the villains, that usually means making them at least a little sympathetic, because as soon as you give them motivations beyond 'for the evulz!' you can begin to identify with them, even if they are doing horrible things.

As for Loki... In the comics I wouldn't say he is a villain right now, hasn't been for a few years. But in the movies, he still is, no matter how much some fangirls want to believe otherwise. He showed a glimmer of being redeemed i the second Thor movie, but they snatched that away with the ending. I still think he could work, though.

[GreenScar1990]

Loki

Dr. Doom

Thanos

Maestro Hulk


That's just a few that I could name.

[Punisher007]

Loki.

Doctor Doom.

Magneto (seriously I'd watch the Hell out of a movie all about Fassbender-neto hunting down and killing Nazi's).

Mystique (complex Mystique, the not mustache-twirling cartoon that Marvel has turn her into. Give her a team of anti-heroes/anti-villains to lead).

Taskmaster.

HYDRA.

Those are just the ones that come to mind immediatey. There are others.

[Post Monster]

I think Ronan could work. The Guardians of the Galaxy movie made him out to be a pretty disappointing, one-note bad guy, but in the comics he's developed into a pretty interesting character with some nuance. I think, with the right approach and villain who is far worse than he, (maybe the Skrulls?) Ronan could work as a movie headliner.

And this is why one noting him in that movie was so stupid. Ronan is actually a complex and interesting character with strong political ties to the Kree. Annihilation and War of Kings were fabulous for his development, and I really, really liked him there. Ronan/Crystal is just pure gold.

After reading the new Malekith back-story (they finally gave him one), I think Malekith could also be an interesting character if Marvel keeps developing him. Cackling evil just doesn't work well for anyone not the Joker.

[Agent Z]

None.

Maybe Doom could star in a spinoff as a hacktivist anti-hero alongside Helen Hunt or Meg Ryan in "Doom's got mail: the Sequel". Villains don't deserve to star in movies imo. [And i'm past worn out with the sympathetic villain stuff]

Is there even any real villains left, or are they all just anti-heroes in the making.

Kingpin. Doom. Carnage. Shocker. Red Skull. Mystique. Sinister. Marvel doesn't have a shortage of villains. They just vary in how evil they are.

[Punisher007]

Red Skull's an out and out villain. He's just a monster in pretty much every way.

Carnage is a psychotic serial killer who hates life itself.

The Purple Man is a disgusting rapist.

Sabretooth is an psycho who enjoys inflicting pain and suffering.

Ultron is genocidal.

Kingpin is a ruthless crime lord who doesn't hesitate to use violence to get what he wants.

Norman Osborn is, well Norman Osborn. He basically lives to make Spider-Man's life miserable.

Bullseye is a despicable assassin.

Etc.

[Agent Z]

Red Skull's an out and out villain. He's just a monster in pretty much every way.

Carnage is a psychotic serial killer who hates life itself.

The Purple Man is a disgusting rapist.

Sabretooth is an psycho who enjoys inflicting pain and suffering.

Ultron is genocidal.

Kingpin is a ruthless crime lord who doesn't hesitate to use violence to get what he wants.

Norman Osborn is, well Norman Osborn. He basically lives to make Spider-Man's life miserable.

Bullseye is a despicable assassin.

Etc.

I've heard Sabretooth's inversion is going to stick.

[Zero Hunter]

Taskmaster.

Funny, oddly tragic, with plenty of fight scenes.

I agree. Just look at how good that first mini series he had that was done by the UDON guys. Give him that look in the movie and maybe have him going against a few other mercs over some prize, and you have a pretty good plot. Throw in some guys like Bullseye, Batroc, Paladin, or Swordsman as people he is racing against to get the prize.

[Iron Maiden]

I agree. Just look at how good that first mini series he had that was done by the UDON guys. Give him that look in the movie and maybe have him going against a few other mercs over some prize, and you have a pretty good plot. Throw in some guys like Bullseye, Batroc, Paladin, or Swordsman as people he is racing against to get the prize.

I think even if he doesn't get a solo, he'd be a good addition to the Captain America films. His more detailed background shows that Taskmaster was (or I guess is ) a SHIELD agent.