Sunday, October 13, 2013

The Worst Of The Worst

I love villains. I love good villains: great villains: AWESOME villains. That's why I'll be posting villain related entries this month, it's a fitting subject for this scary season. That said, there are some villains I just dislike. As in, they really make me hate them not for being so good in their role as villains, but for being so DULL. I like bad guys to be as interesting, entertaining, and fleshed out characters as good guys. These are the baddies I find very weak, bland, boring, and unenjoyable.

 These Four Disney Villains: Edgar from "The Aristocats", Madame Medusa from "The Rescuers", Rourke from "Atlantis: The Lost Empire", and Alimeda Slim from "Home On The Range." Usually  Disney Villains, even the lamer ones like Prince John and Governer Ratcliffe, will have something about them that makes them entertaining. Not these four: they're total bores. Edgar's a greedy, bumbling, almost too polite and even sympathetic to be a bad guy Butler who never leaves a last impression at all. Medusa's a vain, temperamental, ugly witch whose "funny" moments are not at all funny and who is also motivated by petty greed. Speaking of, Rourke is also only in it for the money and his plan is particularly stupid because he wants to commit genocide against an entire lost civilization just so he can get richer off of the valuable relics than he already would be anyway for even freaking discovering the lost empire to begin with! His voice is well performed, but when he's revealed as the villain, his character becomes this smirking, sneering, joke cracking asshole who is just plain bland. And Slim is the worst. A stereotypical cartoon western outlaw with a talent for yodeling. Need I even elaborate? What a disgrace to Disney villains!

 Cars Villains: Of all the bad guys to appear in Pixar movies, these guys were the worst. Chick Hicks from the first "Cars" is basically a more jerkish version of the protagonist minus the character development. He's just some asshole who wants glory. Take away Michael Keaton as his voice and he's got nothing going for him at all. Even worse is Dr. Z and Miles Axelrod in the sequel. Z is a tired mad doctor cliche who lacks any threat or presence, and Miles is the equally cliched corrupt corporate executive who wants to extort money from others.

 Blackbeard: It was a tough decision between him and Cutler Beckett, since neither of them are Barbossa or Davy Jones. But at least Beckett was well acted. Did Ian MacShane get bad direction or was he just not trying here? Either way, he gives a strangely dull performance as the most famed pirate who ever lived, and the character himself isn't very interesting or compelling at all. He's just every bad trait a pirate could have rolled into this one "character." And he doesn't even have any love for his own daughter, too! He's just a stale pure evil villain to the end. 

 Young Xehanort: Xehanort was a marvelous villain. And then this little shit came in and spoiled his image. He's Master Xehanort as a teenager from the Destiny Islands who's been corrupted by his Heartless who went back in time to corrupt him so that he could go back and forward in time to initiate the plan to form the "true Organization XIII" made up of 13 variants of Xehanort. Sound stupid to you? It is. This boy isn't even as evil and hammy as the other Xehanorts: he's just doing what he's been told to do by his future self. I can't say I completely despise him because it's clear he harbors disdain for the role he has to play just like I do, and Ben Diskin added a certain charm to him with his dub performance. But like a Nobody, he shouldn't exist. 

 Apollo: The acting boss of Neo Team Rocket in the second generation of Pokemon games. Unlike Giovanni, this guy has absolutely nothing going for him in the way of personality or charm. You confront him only once at the Radio Tower as the climax of Team Rocket's plot, where he abruptly introduces himself and reveals his pathetic motivation. After defeating him in battle, he wusses out and has Team Rocket disband once more. What a tool! 

 Sird: Sird was introduced in the "Pokemon Special" manga as a Team Rocket executive, a creepy vampiric character who stood out amongst her colleagues. But then she survived something she shouldn't have and had the Kanto Dex Holders turned to stone somehow. That made no sense. Then she was revealed to have given Archie the Guile Hideout armor, which led to the death of Maxie. Boo! Then it was revealed she worked for Team Galactic this whole time, her Darkrai had been the one to paralyze the Dex Holders, that she somehow had a special mind control over one of the team's grunts, and has this strange fixation on the PokeDex. It's just so weird. She showcases no interesting personality beyond being evil, veers on straight-up Villain Sue territory with how much she's had a hand in, and seems to be trying to copy Yami Bakura's style of multi-arc villainy, but failing miserably to get me invested. There is only one way to make her worthwhile, but I doubt that will happen soon enough, if at all. So she remains meh to me.

 Paul: The biggest problem with Paul from the Sinnoh saga of the anime is that he is NOT a villain. He's just an antagonistic rival whom we're supposed to gradually see as an anti-hero even though he goes through next to no changes and does nothing to earn respect or forgiveness. And even putting that part aside, he's just a bland, boring, unenjoyable, uninteresting character. He's made from the same mold as Sasuke Uchiha: a stock Shonen rival character made from all the cliched traits. He has no real definable personality beyond being a cold, stoic, competitive dickhead who wants power, he has a terrible backstory and weak motives for being such a jerk, and he acts in a way that no kid would ever believably act like. It's like he's an inhuman robot made to serve his specific function, just like his rival Ash. And he's a Jerk Sue, getting all the blatant favoritism and special treatment from the head writer. An all around terrible antagonist. 

 Marcus: He has got to be the blandest, most forgettable villain to ever be put in a Pokemon movie. Phantom was at least memorable and Zero was so bad, he was hilarious. This guy had a dull design, dull characterization, dull motivation, dull role in the plot, dull everything. It's almost like he represents everything that's dull about the Sinnoh saga and its' films.

 Zinzolin and Shadow Triad: Team Plasma is a great evil team, but they have these guys on board. I actually don't hate Zinzolin: he's an alright character on his own. I hate the way he was used in "Black and White 2." His role as the team's active leader could have been better played by Colress, with him as just the lackey. In fact, Colress did play that role in the anime and "Pokemon Special" manga, and worked much better in it! Not to mention him ripping off Saturn's motivations in the post-game does not work since Zinzolin is not a particularly interesting or morally gray character at all. The Triad, meanwhile, are interchangeable stoic ninjas who have this annoying life debt to Ghetsis, which means they serve him in his heinous agenda. Not only do they bore me, but they play a subservient role to Zinzolin in BW2. That's all wrong: they should serve just Ghetsis! Colress ought to have played the Zinzolin role, Zinzolin ought to have played the Shadow Triad role, and the Shadow Triad ought to have played a role that was actually interesting! Gah, this shows why Takao Unno's direction for this game's plot was such a mess!

 Bane: A large, hulking masked luchidore who likes to break things. How awesome! It's not the character concept by Chuck Dixon that I dislike, it's the execution. Rather than a lethally strong and smart foe for Batman, all I see is a generic brute who artificially powers himself to make himself seem greater than he actually is, and has little to no motive for doing anything besides money and the sport of it. He's been fun in some animated series', but even then he's a one-trick pony. Tom Hardy's Bane from "The Dark Knight Rises" is easily better than any of the more traditional versions. Aside from the amusing voice, he's actually interesting and motivated

 Black Mask: As boring as a villain gets. I quite liked the original rendition of him, where he was as his name suggests: a mob boss in a black mask. But then he got reinvented into "Black Face Red Skull" and he wasn't the same. He's all about being pure evil, despicable, mean, scary, and threatening, which would be fine if he was compelling and interesting too, but he's NOT. The heinous things he does are done for shock value, and he's not enjoyable: he's just disgusting. He's a villain I would not mind seeing get shot and then staying down for good

 Roland Daggett: The poor man's Norman Osborn voiced by Ed Asner. I love Ed, but he was wasted in this role. Daggett was the most frequently appearing gangster in "Batman: The Animated Series" next to Rupert Thorne. But with Thorne had presence and charisma, Daggett had none. All of the crimes he pulled in his episodes were all about how crooked, exploitative, and greedy he was. It wasn't that interesting the first time and it really got old. 

 Master Shen: In a series like "Dragon Ball" that has so many memorable villains, this guy is the first one to be a total dud. You'd think he would be interesting since he's the evil counterpart to Master Roshi and the older brother of Tao Pi Pi. But his brother was a much better antagonist, and he's coming off of the saga that featured him. Tao did what he did out of love for violence and killing. Shen does bad things out of greed and ambition. There's no intrigue with this character and he fails to leave an impact, even after his pupils turn to good. He sucked. 

 Nappa: The big, bald, muscular Saiyan warrior who was Vegeta's partner. What other characterization does he have but big, dumb, ugly, and violent? None at all. He's the epitome of the generic brute. There's a reason why Vegeta got credited with killing three allies even though Nappa's the one who actually did that. It's because Nappa is a tool: he's literally Vegeta's living weapon. Vegeta could have shot those guys with a firearm and there would be no difference. And like a gun out of ammo, Nappa was disposable too. And then he's never spoken of again. Despite being played for laughs, Nappa from "DBZ Abridged" is actually closer to what the character should have been because at least there he actually has his own personality and quirks. 

 Dodoria: The lumpy, horn-headed pink alien who served Freeza. He was built up as formidable and menacing at the saga's start, and also in the Bardock special. And yet...he really isn't. He gets outsmarted, outrun, outfought, and outmaneuvered by Krillin and Gohan, and then completely owned by Vegeta, who kills him. What a Faux-Badass villain! 

 Android 19: A total robot who worked for Dr. Gero, fought with Goku until Goku fell ill and was unable to fight, and then got beaten and destroyed by Super Saiyan Vegeta. Was there anything interesting or unique about this character? Nope! Not at all. 

 Spopavitch and Yamu: A big, dumb, ugly, violent, bald-headed brute who works with a stronger, smarter, more rational comrade of the same race. Yes, they're boring copies of Nappa and Vegeta, only they're both just disposable pawns. Spopavitch does even less than Nappa: he just fights once to display that something's up with him, only to later be worfed and graphically killed by Babidi's magic. LAME! And Yamu gets destroyed by another weak disposable pawn. No one mourns them or speaks of them again. Good lord, these guys sucked! 

 Super Buu: Fat Majin Buu was fun and fascinating. Evil Buu was genuinely menacing while still keeping some comedic traits. And Kid Buu is a batshit insane monster. Between that second and third one, though, there was "Super Buu": Evil Buu swallows Piccolo and Gotenks to become this ugly-ass form with a long head-antenna and a nose. He then proceeds to completely murder the plot by beating and eating Gohan, taking his clothes and powers. All the while he's acting like this brutish blowhard who's more annoying than funny and more boring than threatening or compelling. I actually dozed off watching his antics. He never should have been! 

 Belum: By far the most generic and forgettable villain in the entire "Legend Of Zelda" series. Just look at that design! Is that going to stand out in your memory? 

 Carnage: The even more evil and psychotic spawn of Venom who enjoys killing people for thrills and devouring their remains. It's a symbiote bonded with a crazy serial killer named Cletus Kassidy who is...well, just exactly that: a crazy serial killer. No history, no established background, no motivations or real personality. He's just an ax-crazy psycho who likes to kill. Does that sound like a boring character to you? Well he's got an awesome design and he works well...for one story. Or at least one story once every few years. But instead, the guy got massive overexposure. People really love this villain, and I have no idea why. He's not cool, he's not fun, he's not interesting, he's not developed: he's boring! At least Venom had some substance to his character when he was a villain, and only really got bad when he became an anti-hero. There's absolutely nothing to suggest that Carnage would make a great recurring villain, and yet that's exactly what Marvel turned him into. And I just don't get that. Carnage is always a one-trick pony.

 Kraven The Hunter: Before Carnage took his place, Kraven was the blandest and lamest of Spider-Man's rogues' gallery. He's a stuck-up Soviet with a passion for African culture who likes to hunt people for sport, and is especially obsessed with hunting Spider-Man. That was really all he ever had to his character. He did us all a favor by blowing his brains out, but for some reason he got lionized as a villain for that! Why? He was never that cool a villain. He's dull!

 Norman Osborn: *Gasp!* Norman Osborn? But he's Spidey's greatest foe! How can you not like him? Let me explain: I DO like Norman a lot. He was a fascinating character and a great villain in his initial stories before he got killed off. I didn't like the explanation for his revival years later, but his part in the "Revelations" story itself was epic, keeping him the cruel, maniacal, awesome adversary he'd always been. He had a good run of stories after this...and then came stories called "Gathering Of Five" and "The Final Chapter." Not only was Norman reduced to a cackling, raving madman in his Norman persona, which defeats the purpose of his Jekyll-Hyde duality (Duality: NOT schizophrenia, folks!), but it was revealed that Aunt May was still alive and held captive by Norman, and that the "Aunt May" that had died was an actress paid by Norman to play the part and die in a way that would mess Peter up bad. This was the point where Norman's role as Peter's arch enemy was taken to ridiculous extremes, and the character was knocked into Villain Sue territory. And it didn't stop there! In many following stories, the man simply does not let up on tormenting this one guy and trying to ruin his life in any way possible. It reached the point where he seemed to be behind everything that went wrong in Peter's life! Dude, you're a major corporate executive and a criminal mastermind! Get a life already! And don't even get me started on the lame-ass Iron Patriot business, which just kills so much suspension of disbelief. So yeah, he's gotten boring in the comics. However, in a few stories like Paul Jenkin's "Revenge of the Green Goblin" and "Death In The Family" storylines, and Mark Millar's "Marvel Knights" story, I enjoyed him again. And thank goodness for Wilem Dafoe, Alan Rachins and Steve Blum for giving great interpretations! 

 The Lizard: In the comics, the Lizard is okay, but he's another one of those villains who is sort of a one-trick pony. There's basically only one Lizard story to ever tell: it has just been told in different ways. Sometimes repeatedly. The Lizard in "The Amazing Spider-Man" movie, however, was something else altogether. I love Rhys Ifans and he's a terrific actor for playing villains. His Curt Connors was pretty compelling and sympathetic. So of course most of his scenes establishing pathos and motivation for the character had to end up on the cutting room floor, and he had to turn into a complete fail of a Lizard. His CGI design looks like Godzilla with Voldemort's face, his evil plan is stupid, his character is generic and boring, and the performance doesn't really come through. And while Peter may feel responsible for what happened to Connors, 
I don't really feel any personal connection between the two, nor can I feel sorry for Connors at all. We've gone from the Green Goblin, Doc Ock, Harry Osborn, and Venom to THIS? And even Sandman at least had better CGI, and the actor sold the sympathy moments. This villain was weak. 

 Judas Traveller: Worst Spider-Man villain ever! 'Nuff said!

 Noah Kaiba: The rich little twit who stalled the Battle City finals in the anime just so we could go through a crappy filler arc in the Virtual World that seemed meant to show off more card game duels and explore the history of the favored character. Kaiba was right on the money when he called this ordeal a complete waste of time. All the while, Noah remained annoying, uninteresting, and unlikable. He also creates a huge plot hole: if Seto was Gozaburo Kaiba's adopted son while Noah was his biological son, than how come Noah resembles Seto so much? The design is completely wrong for the character: as wrong as Andrew Rannell's voice! Like Nappa, the Abridged (Cancelled) Series makes him a much better villain and enjoyable character. 

 Zhuqiaomon: All the build up for the great and terrible Digimon Sovereign who was in charge of the Devas and their mission, and he ended up being a pompous windbag of a phoenix who gets confronted, fought, and dealt with in a very anti-climactic manner. What a letdown! Maybe that was the point, but he wasn't very interesting or engaging either. 

 The Royal Knights: First two of them served Lucemon in what was the worst point in Digimon history until "Young Hunters" came around. Then the whole team served Yggdrasil in the disappointing final arc of "Data Squad." Both times, they were boring. 

 Yggdrasil: The God of the Digital World just...did not work as the antagonist for the final arc of "Data Squad." At all! This role should have been played by Lucemon and the Demon Lords! The build-up was already there! Yet we got this pretentious ripoff?

 Mammoth Mogul: He was a boring, unimpressive villain for the longest time. Just who or what is he supposed to be in this series? Is he an enemy to Sonic? Tail's enemy? Knuckles' enemy? What purpose did he serve? And being so aggravatingly pompous and boastful doesn't do anything for him, especially since he often failed to live up to his own hype. Only when he took a page from The Penguin and became a legit organized crime boss did he get cool. 

 The Iron Domination: Mammoth Mogul, you've been replaced. These ass-clowns are by far the blandest, most unengaging villains to ever appear in "Sonic." Their designs, characters, motives, plans, everything is just so bland. They're major Villain Sues as well! 

 Doomsday: The trope confider for "Generic Doomsday Villain."  He was the big, scary, evil monster who came out of nowhere, had no motivation but to wreck shit and kill things, had no characterization or dialogue at all, and was defined solely by the threat he posed as the villain who killed Superman. And that's really all he ever needed to be. But again they bring him back, even though he died along with Superman and he's clearly best as a one-shot villain!

 Darkseid: Like Norman Osborn, I actually do like Darkseid when he's written interestingly and feels like a legitimate threat with a powerful presence. But not only does he come off as the most generic evil overlord ever in some incarnations, but DC has overexposed him like mad. Remember when he was a big deal? With putting him as the main villain of a story arc was considered special? Now he's appeared in just about every big DC story and crossover, even f**king "Countdown!" They messed up his role in the JLU finale too! How could they do that? 

 Superboy Prime: "I'll kill you! I'll kill you to death!" Yeah, this is not a menacing, compelling supervillain. This is a whiny little bitch made to be a strawman for old school comic book fans. Had his story ended at "Infinite Crisis", he'd have been much better remembered. 

 Emperor Gestahl: A boring, generic evil emperor. What's even his personality besides being an evil, power-hungry jerk? Emperor Palpatine was at least distinctive in his hammy evilness and fixation on the dark side. This guy is just a cardboard cutout.  

 Dr. Hollander: The ugly, boring evil scientist behind Project G in the spin-off action game of "Final Fantasy VII". There was nothing interesting or enjoyable about this guy, his voice was incredibly flat and grating, and his role in the story was literally to be a poor man's Hojo. He commits scientific atrocities that could have very well just been committed by Hojo anyway, so what was the point of this character even existing? At least Genesis was amusing in how lame he was. Hollander is just so bland and forgettable! He really was a third rate hack scientist.  

 Shuyin: He's an evil Tidus with a sob story for why he's been driven to madness and wants to wipe out all of Spira now. That's all he ever really amounted to me.

 Amonia Pine: Annoying, unfunny agent of F.O.W.L who's obsessed with cleaning things up in her own strange way. Give me Steelbeak over her any day! 

 Saegrum: Does anybody honestly remember anything this guy contributed other than being Gaav's tool? Not really. He wasn't that interesting in the books too! 

 Alcumace: An evil alien overlord in "Slayers?" No thanks! 

 Don Kreig: He was nothing more than an overpowered, overglorified schoolyard bully and a coward. Nothing he did in his story arc stands out in my memory. When all's said and done, he's one of the least distinguished, least interesting villains in the series. 

 Admiral Akainu: I hate this guy and I hate what he represents. Bringing in him was the point where "One Piece" took a turn for the worse. The series has many absolutely despicable villains, but most of them are enjoyable and interesting in their own ways. Not this guy. He's a full-stop bad guy who uses the laws of the World Government to be bad and torture others. And his presence signifies the "Pirates VS The Government" angle that the series took, and 
I hate that. There's nothing really fun or interesting about Akainu. He's just a jackass, nothing more. 

 Kaolinite: The blandest "Sailor Moon" villain, bar none. Moreso in the anime where she's just the magic using assistant of the far more interesting Dr. Tomoe, but even in the manga, she stands out least in my memory. She's just a generic bitch. 

 Naruto and Bleach Villains: Not ALL villains from these series', but most of them. Especially their Big Bads, Madara Uchiha in "Naruto" and Sosuke Aizen in "Bleach", the latter being the textbook definition of a Villain Sue. They're mostly so...unengaging. 

 Priscilla: Is up there with Aizen as the definitive Villain Sue. 

 Brittania: Damn near all villains from the nation of Brittania in "Code Geass" were just awfully written. The first season had Clovis, Cornelia, Viletta, Jeremiah, Schneizel, and even most of the generic mooks as racist, fascist, homicidal monsters who terrorized and killed Japanese civilians for fun. The Emperor was a straw Social Darwinist who wanted nothing more or less than ultimate power over all weaker beings. These villains were made to look so heinous and reprehensible as means of making it easier to side with our malicious terrorist protagonist. If he's opposing these guys and trying to dethrone them of power and rid the world of their kind, then surely everything he does must be necessary, right, and cool! Such black-and-white characterization of the major Britannian characters bored me. It was as bad as the Slytherin house! Then R2 tried to add more moral grayness. Cornelia, Viletta, and Jeremiah all turned good for no reason, Schniezel was outed as an anti-villain, and even the Emperor felt he had good intentions of trying to assimilate everyone's souls into a perfect world "without lies." Funny, seeing as he lies to everyone in order for this plan to work! It just...didn't add up. Had the Britannians been portrayed with more nuance from the beginning, I would have been fine with them. But as they are, they're shallow.

 Truth: This self-absorbed, effeminate looking guy who turns into a downright silly looking psycho monster in battle is the successor to Dewey Novak? NO.

 Gundam Villains: There are some great villains in the Gundam franchise, but it seems those are few and far between next to villains that are either simplistically characterized dickheads, or super serious extremists with the pretense of being deep who are instead just bland and obnoxious. Pictured is Ribbons Almark from "Gundam 00", whom 
I feel is a prime offender in demonstrating how Gundam should NOT handle a villain, yet did anyway. 

 Koji Mujo: The one dimensional eeeeevil smug snake antagonist of "Scry-Ed" second season. Considering that we had a cool antagonist in Martin Zigmar, this guy was a big step down. And I mean WAY big. Nothing went right whenever he was at work.

 Chaka: A small-time gangster from "Black Lagoon" who epitomizes the Stupid Evil psychopath. He had no layers and just as much entertainment value. 

 Teppei Houjo: Satoko's evil uncle in "Higurashi" is pretty much a lower scale version of the above villain. There are villains who fail to be the least bit entertaining in their evildoing and there are those who don't even try to begin with. While it makes sense for cases like Teppei and it works, that still doesn't make his character worth much to me.

 Naraku: I've spoken of the Big Bad of "Inu-Yasha" before a few entries back. He's a creepy, nefarious, menacing villain who started off showing tons of potential. But then he just refused to die and stay down. Not only that, but he kept on pulling new powers and abilities out of his ass in order to explain how he could stay alive. And his character got so stale and one-note that by the end I felt absolutely nothing for him, not even hatred in the good way. I only felt contempt over what a plot tumor and a Villain Sue he had become. Such a waste of a bad guy. 

 Hardner: He and his forces were the most boring and pointless villains in the "Rave Master" series. Hardner himself was not well designed, not well written, and not engaging. I found him to be sort of laughable, especially when he went down. I couldn't even bring myself to feel sorry for him when he expressed guilt: I just wanted him out of there ASAP!

 The Unknown Man: The "Elfen Lied" manga is better than it's anime for the most part...except for this guy. This character just makes me think "what was the writer thinking?" He's called "the Unknown Man", but that's not even his name in-story. He literally has no name given, he has no real purpose, he's just there to be a Complete Monster who does the most despicable and horrific things. If the worst of humanity had to be represented, I thought the story did a bang-up job with that anyway with some of the other characters. We did not need this guy. He's not interesting, he's not entertaining, he's horrible, boring, pointless, and hard to stomach. My only great pleasure that comes from this dude is how he dies like the insignificant punk that he is!

 Hulk-Grisor: The main mamodo antagonist of the first filler arc in "Zatch Bell", Grisor, started off as interesting, entertaining, and even kind of likable. Then the magic mirror's power turned him into this thing, and suddenly all he can talk about is how great this new power is, how power is all that matters, how he will crush his foes and become king with his newfound power, and all these incredibly generic big villain stuff that's just so tired and dull, not to mention annoying! I ended up hating his guts and wishing for his demise not for anything he did, but because I wanted him to shut up! Thank goodness he didn't last too long. Such an irritating bore

 James: The eeeevil vampire from "Twilight." Need I even go on after that? Aro and the Volturi are at least sort of entertaining, and motivated. This guy was evil for evil's sake and was the most generic psychopathic vampire possible. Spike or Angelus he ain't. 

 Gregor Cleggaine and Ramsay Bolton: The antagonists 
in "Game Of Thrones" (books and show alike) vary, but these are the two I find myself not caring for. Whereas I enjoy hating horrific monsters like King Joffrey or Euron Greyjoy, I just hate these two. Gregor is a one-note pure evil, monstrous brute, and Ramsay is the most generic psychopathic sadist ever. While it's true that the actor who plays the latter on the show makes him more fleshed out and darkly humorous, that doesn't make him enjoyable when his actions become way too much. Both of them just suck at holding my investment, and the sooner they're offed, the better. 

 Buffalo Bill: This lunatic serial killer is strange, scary, completely deranged, pure evil, and uncomfortable to watch. This wouldn't be a real problem itself since he's supposed to invoke horror, but he also commits the unpardonable crime of not being interesting. People like Hannibal Lecter and Francis Dolarhyde scare me, but they also intrigue me. Their madness is fascinating and I like seeing more of them because of it. Bill doesn't really have a fascinating sort of insane psyche and doesn't display any interesting or humanizing qualities. I find myself wishing the film to cut away from his scenes and go back to the good stuff. He's boring

 Professor Moriarty: As in the Moriarty played by Jared Harris in the film "Sherlock Holmes: Game Of Shadows." A different Moriarty played by a different guy with a completely different plan was built up in the first movie. And yet in the sequel, THIS is who we got. Harris looks scruffy and generic in the role, exudes no presence whatsoever, and his character is written completely wrong. Rather than be Holmes' intellectual equal, he seems to just be a depraved super-criminal who's bent on large scale domination. It was such a total botching of this character! 

 Sylar: He's practically the live action Naraku! Die already! 

 Albert Wesker: I've never been a fan of the "Resident Evil" games, and this dude is just another reason why that is. He's a bland antagonist who just gets more ridiculous with each passing games. And there are zombies in this! Why should I be scared of him?  

 Luca Blight: How is anyone a fan of this villain? He is the most boring, simplistic, over-the-top Complete Monster ever! He may be hateable and a threat, but he's not interesting and he's not fun. No, Luca, you are not the face of evil: you're just a dumbass! 

 Apocalypse: Several X-Men villains can be pretty damn boring and uninspired depending on how they get interpreted, but the one who seems to consistently bore me is Apocalypse. He's touted as a "big villain" yet never does anything that big or long-lasting. His Darwinist agenda makes no sense. He's a Generic Doomsday Villain of the highest degree, his blue-lipped Sentinel design looks ridiculous, and he roped Mr. Sinister, a potentially interesting villain, into being an extension of him! I hardly ever care to see this guy in anything X-Men, he's so lame.

 The Red Skull: The original Red Skull can be an effective villain, but he's never really interested me as a character. When a villain is just a total sociopath who is full of hate for everyone and everything in life, there's not much room for analyzing or investment. Ultimate Red Skull is even worse. He just goes all out in being an over-the-top Complete Monster. 

 Vilgax: He's got a cool name, design, voice, and role, and yet Vilgax never interested me in "Ben 10." I actually thought he was the least interesting of the major villains. He's nothing more than a generic evil galactic warlord and a one-note baddie. But he played that one note pretty well, all things considered. Then the sequel series' came along and completely ruined him. In "Ultimate Alien Force" is an idiot blowhard and a Darkseid rip-off who tries to defeat Ben in the most inane ways possible, and in "Omniverse" he's been made the butt of several dense and wacky jokes. He was never the best villain, but damn, he didn't deserve that sort of treatment! 

 Ultimate Aggregor: When Aggregor first showed up on the scene, he seemed more interesting, menacing, and competent than any of the "Alien Force" Big Bads. But then, after spelling out the true nature of Ozmosyans, he absorbed several alien's life energy in order to become Ultimate Aggregor. In this form, he was just a brute who took care of all his obstacles with his immense new power, and didn't even show much competence any more since instead he relied on the heroes doing all the work for him before he took the prize. To top it all off, 
his design is hideous. Derrick Wyatt hated the open shirt look, but that was way preferable to this! 

 Dr. Phibes: Not a good villain. Not even a good Scooby Doo villain! 

 The Fallen: I made the mistake of sitting through this movie, and anytime the villain was on-screen, the one thought running through my head was "Oh God, this guy is SO BORING!"  The third "Transformers" movie is just as bad as this one, but at least that had Sentinel Prime voiced by Leonard Nimoy as the main antagonist, instead of this Sith Lord Wannabe.

 The Triceratons: I prefer the Foot Clan, the Utroms, and just about anyone else to these guys. They were completely dull and their conflict was not engaging.

 Ed Wuncler Sr.: Again, why waste Ed Asner on a generic crooked corporate bad guy? And he performs the role very well too. Yet the character is still so dull. 

 General Modula: Nothing about him stood out to me at all. 

 Scott: Or "Scott the dick" as I like to think of him as. He's basically like Alejandro, minus the charisma and skill. I'd even take Justin back over this putz. 

 Aloysus O'Hare: When I first heard of him, I was under the false impression that'd he be a villain with ties to the Once-ler's backstory. The name also made me assume he was Irish. An elderly Irish man would have made a much more enjoyable and charismatic villain than this guy. He's got a weak design, a stock "greedy amoral businessman" villain archetype for a personality, has zero bearing on the actual story of The Lorax, and Robert Riggle as his voice was all wrong! He didn't sound funny: just grating and obnoxious. Such a lame villain. Why'd they even bother with him when Once-ler as the rightful antagonist could have used more screentime? 

 Jason Voorhes: Slasher villains are often a dime-a-dozen, but Jason is by far the weakest and most boring. Bad childhood experiences at camp and nearly dying due to counselors  being distracted with sex causes this guy to take it out by killing? Weak! He also wears a hockey mask, hides in the bushes, stalks teenagers to kill, and just breathes and grunts, never uttering a single syllable. What a badass. His theme sound is catchy, but that's about it. 

 John Doe: It's Kevin Spacey! He's gotta be a cool villain, right? But he's not. All he ends up doing is rambling on and on about his self-important insanity and desire to create a murderous masterpiece that is so nonsensical that I can't bring myself to care, and then lead the film to it's wretched conclusion. I give the actor props, but this was bad material. 

 Power Rangers Villains: Some villains in this franchise have entertainment value, like Lord Zed, Astronoma, Ransik, and Master Org. Others are just lame, dumb, boring, unamusing, and the epitome of generic evilness. They have next to no substance or soul.

New! Malekith The Accursed: Generic Doomsday Villain Incarnate.

The Runner Ups: (Villains who don't interest me as characters but have some merits as villains)
Darth Maul, Jango Fett, and others (Star Wars), Bellatrix and Fenrir (Harry Potter), Teams Aqua and Magma, Hunter J, Phantom, Zero, and Ghetsis (Pokemon), Fire Lord Ozai (Avatar), Yakone and Unalaq (Legend of Korra), Commander Red (Dragon Ball), Hydro Man, Tinkerer, Shocker, Silvermane, and Morbius (Spider-Man), Dartz and Siegfried (Yu-Gi-Oh!), Machinedramon, BlackWarGreymon, Cherubimon, Quartzmon, and Milleniumon (Digimon), Exdeath, Genesis, Seifer, Ultimecia, and Dysley (Final Fantasy), Keel Lorenz (Neon Genesis Evangelion), Gonzou Tarkune (Yu Yu Hakusho), Higuchi and Kiyomi Takada (Death Note), Hao Asakura (Shaman King), Clear Note (Zatch Bell), Dante, Father, and others (Full Metal Alchemist), the Beast Men and the Anti Spiral (Gurren Lagann), Incognito (Hellsing), Akito Sohma and Ren Sohma (Fruits Basket), Nero (Star Trek), Adam and the First Evil (Buffy: The Vampire Slayer), Greg and Tamara (Once Upon A Time), Lord Ari and all villains afterwards (W.I.T.C.H), the Light (Young Justice), King Zarkon (Voltron), and others.

21 comments:

  1. "The biggest problem with Paul from the Sinnoh saga of the anime is that he is NOT a villain."

    So why is he on the list then to begin with?

    "He's just an antagonistic rival whom we're supposed to gradually see as an anti-hero even though he goes through next to no changes and does nothing to earn respect or forgiveness."

    Disagreed as well you can see differences in how he was at the beginning and the end.
    -He treats Ash and his friends with a little more respect, once he finds out Ash beat Brandon and the Battle Pyramid.
    -He eventually helped Ash and his friends against Team Rocket.
    -Congratulated Electivire for his performance.


    "And even putting that part aside, he's just a bland, boring, unenjoyable, uninteresting character. He's made from the same mold as Sasuke Uchiha: a stock Shonen rival character made from all the cliched traits."

    Perhaps, but the pokemon anime had SO MANY characters that were just little more than goodie two shoes, that the show was in dire need of a character that was in more of the gray area.

    "He has no real definable personality beyond being a cold, stoic, competitive dickhead who wants power"

    How many characters in the anime DO have definable personality traits beyond their core elements? Even then at least Paul showed some subtle changes from where he was at the beginning.

    "he has a terrible backstory and weak motives for being such a jerk"

    He saw his brother as weak for not only losing at the battle pyramid, but for not even trying again. So he built up a perverted idea of what true inner strength is, the opposite of his brother. What's so weak about that?

    "and he acts in a way that no kid would ever believably act like."

    Someones never been to a daycare when they were in Elementary School. ;)

    "It's like he's an inhuman robot made to serve his specific function, just like his rival Ash."

    He doesn't act like a jerk to EVERYONE he comes across. He never disrespected his brother, nurse joy, Cynthia, or even Barry for that matter, and unlike Ash, he HAS shown some change from where he was.

    "And he's a Jerk Sue as well, getting all the blatant favoritism and special treatment from the head writer. A terrible antagonist, full stop."

    A terrible antagonist? Paul was still a dark mirror compared to Ash, which the best antagonists are. Trip as a character was a massive disappointment compared to Paul. As he was in no way a counter point to Ash in any way compared to Gary or Paul.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh boy, you're a Paul apologist. -_-

      He's an antagonist, but not treated like a villain. By all logic, he SHOULD be treated like a villain. Therefore, I lump him in with the villains.

      He literally ONLY changed a little bit in the last season, "Sinnoh League Victors". And even then he talks like a jerk, did nothing to earn respect or forgiveness, and not once did he ever have to say he was sorry for anything.

      Lol, WHAT gray area? He was an unlikable, abusive jerkass, full stop. Tomioka tried to write him as a gray shaded rival who just had "a different way" than Ash, but it did not come off on-screen at all. And I've heard the "the show has so many nice guys, so a total asshole is refreshing!" argument before. No, one-note mean guys are just as bland as one-note nice guys.

      There was also nothing subtle about Paul. He was as subtle as a brick to the face. The anime, especially in DP, was hardly capable of subtlety.

      It's the way the backstory was executed. He seemed to go bad the moment his brother lost and was told off for losing. It was laughably bad.

      There are antisocial kids, and then there are creepy, unemotional androids. Paul is the latter. He's as believable as Henry Evans.

      There were jerkass undertones to the way he spoke with his brother prior to his own battle with Brandon, and to Barry before the Sinnoh League. Everyone he's not rude to, he is only under obligation. He's not stupid: he knows that there are some people he can't get away with bad-mouthing. But to people he feels are beneath him, like Maylene, he shows his true colors.

      Problem is that by Sinnoh, Ash is a terrible protagonist. Therefore, his dark mirror is an equally terrible antagonist. I consider Trip a step up because he at least had humanity and clearly displayed growth, and the less his character is bound to Ash's, the better.

      Delete
    2. "Oh boy, you're a Paul apologist."

      WOW jumping the gun on your assumption aren't we? Your sure to win hearts and minds with THAT ATTITUDE. Maybe, JUST MAYBE it's more like I have a different opinion than you do.

      What makes you think we were supposed to forgive him for everything? Just because people that like his character, don't chastise him for his acts of cruelty afterwards; doesn't mean he atoned for everything in everyones eyes, at least in my eyes. We were just meant to appreciate the small steps he's taken. Apparently those steps were too small for you.

      The worst thing he ever did was his cruel training with Chimchar. But guess what, it was HIS RIGHT on how he wanted to train it. Nothing else he did made him out to be as bad as your making him out to be, with the exception of his words towards Ash and co. and the occasional person like Maylene.

      Also why does he have to say he's sorry to mean it?

      "Lol, WHAT gray area?"

      The fact that you don't have to be a goody two shoes and go the route of "raise your pokemon, with love crap that the series has constantly spewed" to be a good trainer/ raise strong pokemon.

      "He was an unlikable, abusive jerkass, full stop."

      Chimchar, I won't argue on him. But show me where else he was abusive to people or his pokemon. No, the occasional chastising, or releasing pokemon after a short period of time is NOT abusive.

      "And I've heard the "the show has so many nice guys, so a total asshole is refreshing!" argument before. No, one-note mean guys are just as bland as one-note nice guys."

      I would agree with your argument IF I thought Paul was one note, I don't.

      "It's the way the backstory was executed. He seemed to go bad the moment his brother lost and was told off for losing. It was laughably bad."

      That's not the way that scene played out to me at all. The battle result is what put the idea of inner strength in his head, the battle result didn't change him on the drop of a dime.

      "There were jerkass undertones to the way he spoke with his brother prior to his own battle with Brandon, and to Barry before the Sinnoh League."

      Barry I'll agree on, but Reggie is one where I think your seeing things with your own personal bias. Not smiling does not mean there's a jerkish overtone.

      "Everyone he's not rude to, he is only under obligation."

      What obligation was he under to save Ash and his friends that one time? Or to let his Torterra talk with Ash's Grotle. Or to not badmouth Ash after he beat him in their 1st 6 vs. 6 battle? Or to praise his Electivire? Just to name a few.

      Again I think your viewing things with bias on your part, because you seem to be determined to hate Paul no matter what.

      "Problem is that by Sinnoh, Ash is a terrible protagonist. Therefore, his dark mirror is an equally terrible antagonist."

      Which begs the question why do you even watch a show where you consider the main protagonist terrible and have for a long time now? You still watching the show makes no sense to me. I think he's a watchable protagonist, but that's about it. His interaction with Paul made him more interesting to me, at least for that season.

      "I consider Trip a step up because he at least had humanity and clearly displayed growth"

      I liked Paul better because of his lack of humanity in certain areas. Also Trip didn't display growth until near the end of Unova; they also had to dumb down Ash more than usual to even make Trip seem like a threat.

      "and the less his character is bound to Ash's, the better."

      For better or worse, Ash is the main character; and Trip as a character was designed to be a main rival to Ash, THAT'S THE LEVEL I judge Trip on. Judging him on that level Trip was a failure.

      Delete
    3. I mean an apologist for Paul being a crappy character. xD

      And yes, Paul's steps were too small. He put one foot forward, but the other stood still. And though he was within his right, animal abuse is never okay. For all we know, he's not really sorry and will revert back to his old ways. And he never faced any real consequences for his behavior and actions. He's a Karma Houdini.

      Of course abusing Pokemon can also toughen them up. There are Team Rocket members who have demonstrated that. That doesn't make the method good, thus it's not a "gray area" for me.

      You've never heard of mental and emotional abuse?

      Paul is very one-note. In fact, he only has three expressions: stoic, grouchy/angry, and smirking. That's it. Even when he's meant to be surprised, he looks pissed.

      Except he immediately turned to his Turtwig and gave this glare as if to say "OK, I'm gonna start abusing you now." He DID turn on a dime.

      With Reggie, it'd actually make no sense for him to NOT have any jerkish undertones. Isn't he the one he disrespects so much that he's patterned his training style as the opposite of his? If there's no resentment, that just makes Paul's characterization even crappier.

      Two of those were in the last season, where he "redeemed' himself. I don't think he cared either way what his Torterra did, and after that 6-on-6 battle, he didn't even TALK to Ash. He didn't even ADDRESS him. That's just as jerkish, if not moreso, than badmouthing. Not even a "hey man, are you okay about this?" Nope, Paul was an entirely selfish punk.

      I'm a casual watcher. And the DP seasons were the worst, IMHO. Ash and Paul's interactions were the same damn thing over and over and over again. "Hey Paul!" "Hmph!" "Oh that's right, you're a jerk!" "You're pathetic!" "Why don't you love your Pokemon?" "''Cause I'm strong and you're pathetic!" "My training methods are better! "No, mine are! Your's are pathetic!" And in the case they battle, Paul would win, call Ash pathetic, and sulk away with no emotions whatsoever. It was not interesting, it was predictable.

      Trip started showing growth since his third appearance. Granted, most of his growth ended up a rip-off of Cheren's, but it was at least something, unlike Paul's minimal, next to nonexistent "development."

      I agree, he was a failure. But I also judge characters more than just how they compliment or accommodate the protagonist. I like characters to be their own people, not canon fodder.

      Please do not try to convince me otherwise on Paul. He's up there with Cameron as my most hated character in the Pokemon anime, and IMHO, one of the worst in the whole franchise. I'll let you have your opinion if you let me have mine.

      Delete
    4. "Of course abusing Pokemon can also toughen them up. There are Team Rocket members who have demonstrated that. That doesn't make the method good, thus it's not a "gray area" for me."

      With the exception of Paul's borderline treatment of chimchar; he didn't raise them with abuse. Not showing unconditional love is not the same as abuse. Think of it like a h.s. school football coach who doesn't give a crap about his players beyond if their healthy enough to get the job done. Incosiderate? Sure, but it's not abuse.

      "He's a Karma Houdini."

      Did you miss the part where he got beat at the sinnoh league by the very same pokemon he deemed pathetic? That counts as karma in mine and many other peoples books. Just because he doesn't get comeuppance for every single thing he did in the show does NOT mean karma didn't strike him.

      "Except he immediately turned to his Turtwig and gave this glare as if to say "OK, I'm gonna start abusing you now." He DID turn on a dime."

      You just proved my point. Your determined to see the worst in Paul as a character no matter what; because you apparently don't like his type of character.

      "I'm a casual watcher."

      Who admits that the main protagonist (the only constant in the series at this point) is terrible but still watches the series in any form anyways. To me watching a show like this (casual or not) is insane.

      "I'll let you have your opinion if you let me have mine."

      There's nothing wrong with that. I just think your response to this is something I felt you took a little too personally, compared to say your response to Daniel's at the bottom.
      For instance your "Oh boy you're a Paul appologist" I took as you demeaning my tastes and/or person in general.

      Delete
    5. It's still bad coaching, though. A good coach would value his players despite the tough love he shows. Remember AJ from Kanto? THAT was a good coach!

      That's karma for sure, but the problem is that he seemed to shrug it off rather than learn from it. Or, y'know, apologize? He walked away without ever having to say sorry because the writer didn't want him to look uncool.

      That's because I'm going by what the show presents, both visually and in writing. Paul's "epiphany" upon seeing his brother's loss was exactly as I described. It was the most laughable bit of bad writing.

      Ash, Pikachu, and Team Rocket are the only constants in the series. And it's called Designated Protagonist Syndrome. It's possible to watch and sometimes even like a show even when you dislike the main protagonist. Because there are other things going for it. The way I view the show does not have to revolve around Ash. He's far from the only thing that needs or deserves to be focused on.

      It's because I've heard arguments from Paul apologists before and they have never been good arguments. Paul is the Sasuke Uchiha of Pokemon, and he deserves twice the hate that character gets, yet somehow he's adored and worshiped instead. I don't get that. But then again, this is a fandom who gets invested in Ash too. It seems the most one dimensional of characters will get large fan followings if they're good enough at training and battling.

      Delete
    6. "It's still bad coaching, though. A good coach would value his players despite the tough love he shows. Remember AJ from Kanto? THAT was a good coach!"

      As long as that "bad coach" is racking up wins, it doesn't make sense to say he's a bad one. A coach can be a bad people person while also being amoral, but STILL be good at what he does.

      "That's karma for sure, but the problem is that he seemed to shrug it off rather than learn from it."

      See, I would agree with you on that, had the next thing Paul not did was PRAISE his Electivire for his effort. You know, doing the type of thing he berated Ash for doing for all of the time he's known him.

      "Paul's "epiphany" upon seeing his brother's loss was exactly as I described."

      No it's as you perceived it.

      "And it's called Designated Protagonist Syndrome. It's possible to watch and sometimes even like a show even when you dislike the main protagonist. Because there are other things going for it."

      I would understand that IF Pikachu and Team Rocket weren't as boring and stale as Ash is at this point. Yeah other characters might come along, but why bother? They'll eventually be gone.

      "It's because I've heard arguments from Paul apologists before and they have never been good arguments."

      Correction, they've never been good arguments IN YOUR OPINION.

      Delete
    7. Doing all that to score up wins is still selfish and repugnant though. To try to put a positive spin on Paul's training is like doing the same for Sgt. Hartman's dehumanizing of soldiers in "Full Metal Jacket."

      They were going for character development there, but it instead came off as out-of-character since Paul had not shown any decency or signs of learning better for three whole seasons 'til then.

      I perceived it as such 'cause that's exactly what I saw on the screen.

      All the more reason to enjoy the good stuff when it's there.

      It's my opinion, but I believe it to be true. Paul is a boring stock shonen anime rival and the creator's pet, nothing more or less. AND he was terribly developed. To me, he's how to NOT do a rival or antagonist.

      Delete
    8. Again, I'm going by what was SHOWN on the screen. And though I totally get that Tomioka was going for a gray-shaded antagonist, I felt it just didn't come of that way in execution. Plus, there was no excuse for Paul to be such a monotonous character. Silver from the GS games is Paul's inspiration, and he was WAY more interesting and enjoyable a character even when he was being a total douche. And his reasons for having his views and being the way he was actually made sense, unlike Paul's "Oh no, my brother lost to one of the best trainers in the world! He's too soft! He's weak!" bullshit.

      Yes, you were supposed to accept all that. If you were expecting the writers to give a damn about making sense and drew the line there, I don't know what you were doing even watching the Pokemon anime to begin with. And you sound like the standard BW hater now. Hating Trip even though his character was better realized than Paul's (his CHARACTER, not his role), and hating Iris even though between her and Cilan, she was the more developed character. Decolore was a shark jumping to be sure, but that just makes it even more Orange Islands 2.0.

      If you want to continue this argument, then too bad, because I don't. Go try to convince someone who's newer to the DP anime and Paul. I made up my mind a long time ago. Paul sucks and I don't want too much comments made up of a debate about him and his nonexistent character. Especially from someone who wrote off Amon and Tarrlok as badly written yet finds this one note douche to be well written and compelling.

      Paul is the Sasuke Uchiha of Pokemon. Period.

      Delete
  2. For villains like Luca Blight, I think people like them simply because they WERE complete monster characters---some villains are enjoyable just because of how evil or sickening or hatable they are.

    Look at the Chaos Marines from WH40K(through to be fair, that is really evil vs. evil territory) and see why people like them--they just appear to be awesome.

    Also I would state that Trakeena is another villain from Power Rangers that has entertainment value.

    Why isn't Apocalymon on this list? He's a one note that only appeared at the very end like a giant space flea from nowhere.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That may be a matter of taste, then. Luca Blight just bored and annoyed me. I like evil, sickening, hatable monsters when they have a special something to them that gives them at least an entertaining presence. To me, Luca didn't have that. Which is a shame since I do love his design.

      Trakeena was cool, though she kind of lost me when she merged with that guy.

      Being a Giant Space Flea From Nowhere is exactly why he's not here. He wasn't around enough to really entertain OR bore me. He was just...there. And I think he did make a good Final Boss, all things considered. (Similarly, Necron from Final Fantasy IX isn't on for the same reason.)

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. Lee Jordan from Where On Earth Is Carmen Sandiego? I hated that guy passionately, but I liked him as a villain. He worked great as an honorless foil to both Carmen AND the ACME detectives.

      Delete
  4. According to the DVD commentary for Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Rourke was going to be a German agent in disguise, but they decided it would be "too melodramatic." Even when I was 13, I thought "Seriously?!?"

    I don't see how in a film where a little girl has to watch her mother die as her city is sinking, an explorer taking the ridicule of believing in Atlantis to his grave and his grandson spending a good chunk of his life trying to restore his grandfather's credibility, to the point of wasting his opportunities and where ALL the comic relief characters initially turn out to be evil, that the idea of the villain being a German agent is a lot more over the line.

    While it probably wouldn't have solved a lot of his other problems as a villain, like his dull sense of humour, if he was a mercenary who was ALREADY on some warlords payroll, it probably, not definitely, but probably would have gave him more reason to care more about the Crystal than the lost civilisation which, as mentioned many times would have made him rich anyway.

    At least with Clayton from Tarzan, there is an actual black market that would pay big money for gorillas; dead or alive, Kerchak alone would have got Clayton more than just £300 which would have been considered a luxury back then.

    I understand that Disney needs to keep some things simple and straightforward, but Rourke's motivation needed to be handled much more cleverly than this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That actually would have given Rourke better motivation to be the villain and turn traitor on Mr. Whitmore's expedition. And with the character we ended up with, they actually gave him some backstory with a dead father, a failed romance, and bad experience with war in side materials but not only did none of it make it into the film, none of it really explains away why Rourke did what he was doing in the film. The late James Garner did a great voice performance for Rourke, but that's the only redeeming thing about the character as he turned out.

      I always thought that Clayton ended up much better executed as a character than he had the right to be, since on paper he's pretty flat. Maybe it was his design and Brian Blessed's voice going well together. Same could be said about David Odgen Stiers with Ratcliffe.

      Delete
  5. Clayton actually does have a good idea behind him. In the DVD commentary they mention that he's a dark mirror of Tarzan. Clayton looks down on Tarzan as a "savage" and sees himself as a gentleman......but in reality he's FAR more savage and bestial than Tarzan, who DID grow up in the jungle.

    A lot of good villains work as foils to the hero. One one shot villain in Spiderman (the Thousand) worked despite being horrifying because the whole point was that Peter was a selfless brave hero. As such the Thousand's heartless selfishness and cruelty made him a perfect photonegative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's another of Clayton's saving graces. The commentary also mention that how he becomes sort of a human Sabor in the film's climax, signifying his decline in humanity and embracing of his own natural savagery, as opposed to Tarzan, who's humane enough to not shoot him AND attempt to warn him against accidentally hanging himself (and feel sad when that does happen) even after all he'd done to Kerchack and the gorillas.

      Delete
    2. His sister was also one of the better spinoff bad guys (she's more misguided rather than evil, and ultimately lets go of her hatred when she realizes Clayton's own evil got him killed.)

      Delete
  6. Apocalypse I actually think had a good idea behind him. The series is about evolution and one of the biggest bastardizations of evolution is social darwinism. A villain who preaches a "might makes right" creed and who sees himself as a savior guiding humanity and purging "the weak" COULD work.

    The issue is that he works best ONCE. In Evolution he's the main bad guy of season 4 and his shadow hangs over the entire season; as such when he's beaten it feels like a genuine struggle to overcome the odds and stop his mad ambitions. Whether the show had continued or not they found a way to dispose of him for good if need be (Trapped in the time stream for the rest of eternity).

    Honestly here's how I would have done him. He awakens from stasis and initiates his plan to take over the world. The mutants team up to stop him and they defeat him, with him getting killed by Jean Grey like in the movie. However, his actions have caused widespread destruction and mutant human relations are more strained.

    Basically use him once, have him be a threat, and then don't use him after that. Or have him be the big bad of an entire season building up to him

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've heard the manga version of Marcus' movie fleshes him out a little bit, is that true?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It made him more evil, but not necessarily more interesting. At least not to me.

      Delete