Who's no longer villain material?

[Michael Watkins]

He's still decent enough. The king of flip-flopping is still Daken. lol

i'm not sure how Daken can be on the fence. he was kind of a bad seed to begin with. he's petty by nature. I still like him, though.

[Rosebunse]

i'm not sure how Daken can be on the fence. he was kind of a bad seed to begin with. he's petty by nature. I still like him, though.

Daken did have a good showing when paired with X-23 and Gabby, but does that really redeem him that much? It just means that he loves his sisters, two people a narcissist like him might find easy to love because they remind him of himself.

[Michael Watkins]

Magneto toes the line enough to where he can sometimes believably be on the X-Men's side as one of their staunchest allies or turn against them at the drop of a hat into their deadliest enemy.

I guess that's one things the movies got right with his constant flip-flopping .

to play devil's advocate...Magneto is not a flip flopper. he has mood swings (a nod to him manipulating the poles). sometimes he's very aggressive against humanity. sometimes he just wants to Netflix and sulk. but his mission doesn't change. the X-Men are family members that don't yet see him as the fun uncle. he's interested in their survival/protecting their interests (he's pathological in his distrust of humans). they flip flop on accepting and rejecting him. and it's sad. because almost all of the popular X-Men have gone through their phase of being pro-violence. Storm has ripped someone's heart out and lapped up the blood. Wolverine has almost zero respect for life. and Gambit, all these years later, is still stealing crap. where do an of them get off judging Magneto? and before anyone jumps on. I think Magneto's a bad guy. he's a bigot. civilian casualties don't seem to bother him. he demonstrates a real fascist streak sometime. one of my favorite characters. but i'm not calling him a hero or asking anyone to sympathize with him. i'm saying that he's not the opposite of the X-Men. he occupies the same gray space that they do.

and as for the movie character, that's a different animal. Ian Mckellan's version is jaded pragmatist who basically only sees others as pawns in his personal war. he's demented but very good at playing sane. him dropping Mystique like a bad habit when she lost her powers was a little OOC. but it fit the movie narrative. the comic version would have executed Raven; to spare her the loss of her mutancy (a "mercy" killing). Fassbender's version is pretty effing great though. I think he's in the top 3 of live-action villain portrayals. not sure why I don't like him outside of that role, though.

[Michael Watkins]

Daken did have a good showing when paired with X-23 and Gabby, but does that really redeem him that much? It just means that he loves his sisters, two people a narcissist like him might find easy to love because they remind him of himself.

I picked up two of the trades recently to see his interaction with Laura. I imagine that he'd cling to whatever family he had left. he doesn't have much of a life outside of whatever it is Daken does for a living. I imagine that he does feel like a bit of a freak (and sees some of that in his sisters). they are people who don't judge him for being a killer. but who can ever really tell with Daken? he lies about his intentions as a matter of course.

[Michael Watkins]

I see Magneto as kind of existing in his own little area where he's very hard to classify. I don't see his backslides into villainy as going against development so much as being part of his character. I think his intentions are generally good, but he has this violent dark side where if you push the right buttons, he'll snap and go dark. And it's been fairly consistent for years, where he just kind of dances between anti-hero and anti-villain because he just can't seem to keep his more extreme impulses under control in certain circumstances. I'd like to see him actually manage it, but I also don't really see it as regression when he has one of his villain moments, because it's been built into his character over the years. Unless it's like super extreme. I definitely think he's moved well beyond his mustache twirler origins. At worst he's a bad guy you can sympathize with these days.

I kind of see him as a version of the Punisher who is capable of self-reflection and doesn't need to reload. a lot of his time is spent identifying threats to mutantkind and setting out to eliminate them. at least, that's how Bunn's version came across. but he had most of his family taken away from him w/ the retcon. he's less anti-social than Frank Castle (I think he appreciated the community of the school) but just as tunnel visioned. that reminds me. this used to be Mystique's thing. she was the one with an agenda. I miss that version of Mystique. she's sort of morphed into Viper (no pun intended).

[Michael Watkins]

I think they've made him more morally grey than anything. From a certain point of view, Magneto's intentions aren't bad. It is how he goes about realizing his goals that is where he comes up against opposition. But Xavier has always been appealing to his better nature since the beginning. Maybe having a holocaust survivor act in a manner similar to the Nazis is too much for current editorial? But I do agree, he hasn't been a villain for so long now that any attempt to return to that status quo is like forcing a square into a round hole.

I see this comparison a lot. but, outside of Grant Morrison, have any writers actually gone to that well? if anything, he's a holocaust survivor acting like the Israeli Military. he started by hunting Nazis. then that branched out to any other threats to his people. he's never barcoded humans or put them in work camps. he uses violence to fight the violent. doesn't make him a good person. but calling him a Nazi is a bit much when the Marvel Universe still has actual living Nazis. it's perfectly ok to compare him to other terrorists though. he is a terrorist.

[Michael Watkins]

Stilt-Man used to give Spider-Man and Daredevil a hard time but now he is comic relief, he is now a joke

didn't Bendis retire him? he said that he was tired of being beaten up and called it quits; to Matt Murdock, personally. pretty sure that he was drawn to look like Bendis, as well.

[MichelleDiMera]

I kind of see him as a version of the Punisher who is capable of self-reflection and doesn't need to reload. a lot of his time is spent identifying threats to mutantkind and setting out to eliminate them. at least, that's how Bunn's version came across. but he had most of his family taken away from him w/ the retcon. he's less anti-social than Frank Castle (I think he appreciated the community of the school) but just as tunnel visioned. that reminds me. this used to be Mystique's thing. she was the one with an agenda. I miss that version of Mystique. she's sort of morphed into Viper (no pun intended).

Well the Punisher is a killing psycho...Magneto does what he does in self defense of mutantkind, right or wrong. So they arent near the same.

[Michael Watkins]

Well the Punisher is a killing psycho...Magneto does what he does in self defense of mutantkind, right or wrong. So they arent near the same.

that might be what he told himself, early on. but he actively seeks out threats to re-emphasize his mission. he's likely still experiencing post traumatic stress disorder basically/can't get past what happened to him during his time at the camps. in that way, he and Frank are alike. they are driven by rage. that's why I emphasized Magneto's self-reflection. he knows when he has made a mistake/killed out of anger instead of a need for justice. he has also killed other somewhat innocent mutants because he felt that they were a threat to mutantkind. it's all there in that first issue of Bunn's Magneto run.

[Silver Fang]

Daken did have a good showing when paired with X-23 and Gabby, but does that really redeem him that much? It just means that he loves his sisters, two people a narcissist like him might find easy to love because they remind him of himself.

Apparently it does. You have many that see Daken as an anti-hero. And if Laura cares for him, and now Gabby, it is enough to redeem him. Then when Claws of a Killer came out with him, Creed, and Deathstrike trying to kill Logan, many were complaining at Daken's character regression of being a villain with daddy issues when he's moved passed it.

[Chris0013]

Apparently it does. You have many that see Daken as an anti-hero. And if Laura cares for him, and now Gabby, it is enough to redeem him. Then when Claws of a Killer came out with him, Creed, and Deathstrike trying to kill Logan, many were complaining at Daken's character regression of being a villain with daddy issues when he's moved passed it.

No matter what his path...he still killed a soldier on his way our of Broxton after Siege. That soldier had a wife and little girl. With Daken's skills he could have gotten out of there clean...but did not.

[Silver Fang]

No matter what his path...he still killed a soldier on his way our of Broxton after Siege. That soldier had a wife and little girl. With Daken's skills he could have gotten out of there clean...but did not.

Honestly, I am cool with villains redeeming. Hell I like Orochimaru (Naruto) as a n anti-hero. If he really is one in the new series. But I also have a salty & petty side. So if Creed, one of my favorites, had his good (under Bunn) redemption arc erased to go back to being a loser low-level villain, I don't wanna see Daken getting any good anti-hero chances either. Because they're on the same level. Daken just has the privilege of being a Wolverine.

[Chris0013]

Honestly, I am cool with villains redeeming. Hell I like Orochimaru (Naruto) as a n anti-hero. If he really is one in the new series. But I also have a salty & petty side. So if Creed, one of my favorites, had his good (under Bunn) redemption arc erased to go back to being a loser low-level villain, I don't wanna see Daken getting any good anti-hero chances either. Because they're on the same level. Daken just has the privilege of being a Wolverine.

Redemption needs to be earned. Not just given. And not flip flopped because the next writer decides he wants them to go back to being a villain. Editors and the Editor in Chief need to tell a writer "No...he is a good guy now and has been so for a while...You do not get to flip him just because you like him that way."

[Raye]

Redemption needs to be earned. Not just given. And not flip flopped because the next writer decides he wants them to go back to being a villain. Editors and the Editor in Chief need to tell a writer "No...he is a good guy now and has been so for a while...You do not get to flip him just because you like him that way."

While as I said above, I am cool with how it ended up, I think this is how Magneto's current characterization started out. It likely did start out as an honest attempt to redeem him, then someone else decided he needed his villain cred back, then the next person was like no, i want the face turn to stick. repeat. And eventually it just ended up with his borderline status where he can kinda go either way depending on the circumstances. So that technically that can work out, sort of, I think it does work for Magneto. Also, sometimes the whole point is the trying and eventual failing, so if that is the story, and it was planned that way from the start, ok.

But in general I agree with you, there needs to be some consistency, and the editors should enforce a character's present status. They should consider carefully if they really want a character to switch sides, and not do it at all unless they are prepared to stick with it for a good long while. And if someone wants to flip them back, they better pitch a damn good story surrounding that.

To the general discussion above, I've never liked the "yeah but they did ____ that one time" as reasoning that they can never be redeemed. I don't think we should allow a character's worst acts to forever define them, or redemption would never be possible for any character, and one fuckup for a hero would forever doom them to be considered a villain. The point of face turns is to show that a person can learn from their past and become better than what they were. Though I do think some characters would have a much harder time of it due to the sheer weight of their pasts. The worse their past the more they have to work for it, sure. But sometimes all it takes is a single epiphany to start them on the path, it's just that they'll have to do more to demonstrate to others that they've had a change of heart.

[Silver Fang]

While as I said above, I am cool with how it ended up, I think this is how Magneto's current characterization started out. It likely did start out as an honest attempt to redeem him, then someone else decided he needed his villain cred back, then the next person was like no, i want the face turn to stick. repeat. And eventually it just ended up with his borderline status where he can kinda go either way depending on the circumstances. So that technically that can work out, sort of, I think it does work for Magneto. Also, sometimes the whole point is the trying and eventual failing, so if that is the story, and it was planned that way from the start, ok.

But in general I agree with you, there needs to be some consistency, and the editors should enforce a character's present status. They should consider carefully if they really want a character to switch sides, and not do it at all unless they are prepared to stick with it for a good long while. And if someone wants to flip them back, they better pitch a damn good story surrounding that.

To the general discussion above, I've never liked the "yeah but they did ____ that one time" as reasoning that they can never be redeemed. I don't think we should allow a character's worst acts to forever define them, or redemption would never be possible for any character, and one fuckup for a hero would forever doom them to be considered a villain. The point of face turns is to show that a person can learn from their past and become better than what they were. Though I do think some characters would have a much harder time of it due to the sheer weight of their pasts. The worse their past the more they have to work for it, sure. But sometimes all it takes is a single epiphany to start them on the path, it's just that they'll have to do more to demonstrate to others that they've had a change of heart.

Agree with all this. I think any villain can earn redemption. But it takes time to develop & writers need to keep up with them & stay consistent. Along with editorial.

Again, with Creed, Bunn had a long story detailing his journey. Trying to atone for his horrible past and other writers adding to it by having him acknowledge that it would be hard because many would only see him as a monster. Then his fall back into villainy was gonna be a longer story as well, and Bunn mentioned it would serve as an Alzheimer's metaphor, and illness he lost his own father to.

But Bunn lost the character. Pak got hold of him, and he was randomly antagonistic again, and served as the heel of the book for more than half of it and someone who Old Logan had to keep in line. Then the book ends with his villain flip being caused by Mentallo of all people, now he's evil again & going after the X-Men in WoR.

Talk about wasted potential & opportunity. Especially with Bunn having him say he was gonna try to be something more than the monster & other than the inversion facade. But nope. Easier to have him as Wolverine's punching-bag. So that villain revert happened Asap. However, that's taking into account Pak's horrid writing where Creed didn't even seemed inverted half the time. He was supposed to be Angelus to Angel. But Pak went the Spike route where there's little difference between the good & evil version. And after lots of complaints, Pak started having the inversion announced when it was convenient while still having him doing suspect stuff that doesn't show much change. One issue he's rescuing baby tigers, the next he's wanting to smother someone with a pillow for annoying him.