The Marvel Villain Conundrum

5:35 AM Unknown 0 Comments

This topic has been quite popular in the last few months and I thought it would be a time to throw in my personal two cents into the matter. One thing many people have been quite vocal about a common negative aspect running through the Marvel and even some DC films, the way the villain’s are commonly treated or used within the film’s concept. While I personally believe there is a lot of subtext behind the character of Darren Cross aka Yellowjacket in the recent Marvel Studio production Ant-Man, I cannot deny that some villains have sadly been underused. Some notable mentions have been for example the portrayal of Whiplash in Iron Man 2, Red Skull in Captain America: The First Avenger, Ronan in Guardians of the Galaxy or Malekith in Thor: The Dark World. Still, some people have mentioned that there are examples of them nailing the villains with recent popularity of Loki or even the Winter Soldier. Is there a reason fort his villain conundrum?

In a way, the biggest issue is an old tradition in superhero films. The main villain of the film commonly has to die at the end, as it seems to be the only way to stop him for good. This is an issue I personally have with most of the Marvel films, as the villain commonly dies at the end to ensure that everyone is safe, even if there isn’t truly a reason for it. There are some exceptions of character that i can understand such as Captain America: The Winter Soldier handling Alexander Pierce, or Iron Man 3’s Aldrich Killian, as they were minor characters in the comics that served a specific purpose and to a certain degree seemed to have their deaths as a final touch. In this sense, it is alright to understand there demise, but it still comes at a great price as these characters aren’t given anymore development outside of these films, as they have ceased to exist. Something I still wish the first Iron Man considered when Obediah Stane apparently passed away as the Iron Monger.

Yet then you have characters such as Ronan, Malekith, Red Skull, who actually might still be alive, Yellowjacket and even John Garrett on Agents of SHIELD. All these characters had quite some interesting story arcs for which they could have been used. Malekith was a rather underused villain in The Dark World, but could have been evolved in a future film to actually turn into the insane character he originally was in the comics. There is still potential to use this storyline with the character, as most Asgardian related characters are sent to Hel, so there is still hope, but as of now it still seems like a bit of a waste. Yellowjacket especially represented the inner darkness of Hank Pym, so having him around as a dark mirror to himself would have made for a fantastic evolution of both characters. How about Darren Cross trying to prove to the world that he simply lost his way and they try to heal him from the insanity that the Cross particles have done to him.

As much as I love Guardians of the Galaxy and even the portrayal of Ronan, I cannot deny that his death at the end was probably the biggest waste. He has had a considerable amount of change in the comics starting off as a ruthless monster and ending into an actual well-liked anti-hero. Especially with Lee Pace playing the character it seemed like a waste not to have him be able to prove himself or to learn from his mistakes, but one can still hope that another Accuser might take over that role. Even John Garrett could have been a great character to keep around to further developing Grant Ward in the upcoming third season as he takes his place as a leader of a small fraction of HYDRA.

What is my point with all of this? Well, I just believe that Marvel needs to start finding creative ways to not end up killing off their main villains and give them plenty of screentime within their films as well. Yellowjacket had a fantastic arc in the film, but was only shown his darker side instead of trying to give him exposure as a character rather than just a villain. Naturally, that is a difficult task in general, as I still believe that Ultron was also quite a fascinating character with quite a lot of screentime to prove that he wasn’t only menacing, but actually quite a dark representation of Stark, something that seemed to be echoed in Ant-Man as well.

Are there any examples of how Marvel got it right? Actually, there are two great examples of how these storylines are handled. From a film's perspective, you have the Hulk, who actually does not kill any of the villains he faces, especially when you consider that Blonsky turns into the Abomination and he still manages to avoid killing him and it was even hinted at that he is still being held captured in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Even the Netflix series Daredevil has made a great case for this, as the entire story arc of the character is him fighting the desire or necessity of killing Wilson Fisk, which he overcomes at the end. These are fantastic examples of how they have been able to handle characters correctly and even give the bad guys enough screentime to flesh them out. Naturally, the thirteen episodes of the Netflix series makes this easier, but it still shines light on the importance of how this should be handled throughout the universe.

With Phase 3 heading our way, one can only hope that maybe they have learned from these mistakes and we will not see the main villains constantly dying, as it would take a lot away from their characters. Allowing them to breath and evolve could certainly be a good sign for the future and maybe the rumors surrounding the Netflix Thunderbolts series could shine a light on how they are starting to handle their villains in the future.

What are your thoughts on the matter? Which villain do you think deserved more character development? Leave a comment below!