Why Is In Universe Criticism Of Superheroes Always Associated With Villainy?

[Agent Z]

Lex Luthor, Amanda Waller, Jason Todd, Max Lord, The Elite, the pro-Reg side, Jonah Jameson, Alison Greene, Magog. It seems anyone portrayed as being critical of superheroes instantly becomes a villain. Why's that?

[jbmasta]

The virtue of the heroes being the main characters, are they always right? It does sometimes get to the point where you feel the bad guys have a more reasonable case than the heroes do. If it is genuinely good feedback, like easing up on the collateral damage, then they are closer to the designated villain. But if the villain does bad things, or invokes ends justifying the very harsh means, then they have made the decision themselves. You've got to assess who has the more reasonably justifiable position.

[WebLurker]

Probably since most comics have a superhero protagonist, it makes most sense (narratively speaking) to have those that oppose them as villains. Also, evil people in positions of power makes for a more entertaining story than ethical people in power do (esp. when the heroes are not the people in power).

(Also, I don't think J. Jonah Jameson counts as a villain.)

[worstblogever]

Not always...



Hell, most of the X-Men philosophies for teams factors in, too. Cable's more militant X-Force versus the more mellow X-Men philosophy of the time. X-Factor being the government-sanctioned team vs. that. Most of the 90s X-teams had teams dogging each other out for being sellouts or teetering too close to the edge. Which has carried over to the school versus the militant factions these days.

[millernumber1]

I think because writers know their audience. How many readers read superhero stories to have the good guys spend all their time arguing about whether they should be superheros?

[numberthirty]

Not always...



Hell, most of the X-Men philosophies for teams factors in, too. Cable's more militant X-Force versus the more mellow X-Men philosophy of the time. X-Factor being the government-sanctioned team vs. that. Most of the 90s X-teams had teams dogging each other out for being sellouts or teetering too close to the edge. Which has carried over to the school versus the militant factions these days.

Not just the teams.

There is a whole issue just where potential future and alternate universe versions of the various "X" groups come into play.

[Agent Z]

Probably since most comics have a superhero protagonist, it makes most sense (narratively speaking) to have those that oppose them as villains. Also, evil people in positions of power makes for a more entertaining story than ethical people in power do (esp. when the heroes are not the people in power).

(Also, I don't think J. Jonah Jameson counts as a villain.)

How are superheroes not people on power?

For that matter these stories often overestimate what people in power can get away with.

[Agent Z]

Not always...






Hell, most of the X-Men philosophies for teams factors in, too. Cable's more militant X-Force versus the more mellow X-Men philosophy of the time. X-Factor being the government-sanctioned team vs. that. Most of the 90s X-teams had teams dogging each other out for being sellouts or teetering too close to the edge. Which has carried over to the school versus the militant factions these days.

Not sure if this is the Punisher is the best example given he's more of a villain protagonist. The X-Men thing might have worked in the 90s but it seems less gray today

[worstblogever]

Not sure if this is the Punisher is the best example given he's more of a villain protagonist. The X-Men thing might have worked in the 90s but it seems less gray today

The word is "anti-hero".

And, frankly, I can't believe no one has mentioned Henry Peter Gyrich yet. From the jump, he was written to be a d***, but he had a point about a lot of things.

[WebLurker]

How are superheroes not people on power?

I meant political or corporate power. Most superheroes are civilians.

For that matter these stories often overestimate what people in power can get away with.

Hmm.

[ouroboros]

Probably since most comics have a superhero protagonist, it makes most sense (narratively speaking) to have those that oppose them as villains. Also, evil people in positions of power makes for a more entertaining story than ethical people in power do (esp. when the heroes are not the people in power).

(Also, I don't think J. Jonah Jameson counts as a villain.)

Ditto; Jameson is just a somewhat petty man who envies Spider-Man's joie de vivre. Most of his sins are also petty ones, though on occasion he's stepped across the legal borders by funding super-menaces like the Scorpion and the Spider-Slayer. But even then, he's more of a goof-up than a villain.

[jbmasta]

It does become more interesting when the heroes themselves have crossed a line, or the villains have a legitimate point to make about how the heroes operate. In the Flash TV show during season 1, the captured meta-humans are contained in cells in the accelerator to the knowledge of only Team Flash. When the police department hear about this, they aren't very happy about it.

[JCAll]

Lex Luthor, Amanda Waller, Jason Todd, Max Lord, The Elite, the pro-Reg side, Jonah Jameson, Alison Greene, Magog. It seems anyone portrayed as being critical of superheroes instantly becomes a villain. Why's that?

I would have assumed it was all the murder, but I guess saying nasty things is bad too.

[KnockBlock]

Not always...

This is PIS right? I don't see this happening outside of the Punisher's book.

[Agent Z]

And as of Detective Comics 947, it seems we can now add Steph Briwn to the list of characters who become villains once they disagree with the hero.