Let's talk about: Villains!!

Okay, so I was thinking about villains, and I just really wanted to hear something from you guys.

What do you think makes an awesome villain?

How do you think of one? How do you write them? What are your favorite kinds? Do you want your villains to be likeable, or infinitely hate-able?

Discuss.

edited 4th Nov '11 10:57:41 PM by NoirGrimoir

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

Large Ham are my personal favorites. Nothing beats a villain Chewing the Scenery and telling his protagonist No, Mr. Bond, I Expect You to Dine.

I like the Card Carrying variety myself. The guys who know they're evil and aren't at all apologetic about it. Generous servings of ham and cheese don't hurt either.

Theres sex and death and human grime in monochrome for one thin dime and at least the trains all run on time but they dont go anywhere.

Villains that are dynamic, exaggerated, and decisive tend to be the best ones.

It depends. My current most developed villain is a Well-Intentioned Extremist kinda-sorta Anti-Villain, who's actually The Dragon being manipulated by the real Big Bad; he thinks he's working to bring down the Council and hopefully stop the wars that the Houses are constantly fighting, but in fact the Big Bad (one of about three people with a power that can kill him) is planning to pull a You Have Outlived Your Usefulness after he's successfully killed off the hero and heroine. He's also a Gravity Master whose powerset makes him really horrendously overpowered for the universe; as mentioned, the only thing that can kill him is the Haargen House line power, which is not all that formidable by comparison but is unhindered by his gravitational shields. Pretty much the whole first half of the plot involves hero (himself hugely overpowered, but in a manner that doesn't affect Gravity) and heroine running frantically away from him once he reveals himself and commits to killing them. He's also really bloody scary, and makes a practice of crushing people and cutting them apart with his field control.

I think I've succeeded with a serious villain if the audience is vaguely disappointed when he actually dies or is defeated. Either that or if it's a Complete Monster being taken down in a particularly brutal, awesome and/or karmic fashion.

edited 4th Nov '11 11:09:29 PM by alethiophile

Shinigan (Naruto fanfic)

I feel there's really no such thing as an ideal villain - there's lots of kinds you can use, and both an utterly soulless fiend and a morally ambiguous figure who might be right can make effective villains in the right work (although for the record, I think a Complete Monster in the strict sense tends to be a somewhat flat character).

In light of this "evil pluralism", a number of my works contain multiple contending villains, generally including at least one vastly overconfident also-ran who only thinks he's a threat and a number of more "dangerous" villains from multiple regions on the Sliding Scale of Antagonist Vileness, most of whom will be fairly distinct - for instance, if there's a number of card-carrying scenery-chewers, only one will prove a serious threat (and for the record, I do enjoy making legitimately dangerous Card Carrying Villains). So I guess that I could say that what makes good villains in my works is diversity.

I like the ones played by Christopher Lee.

Teens dress as Batman to catch pedophiles; cops not impressed

Likeable villains all the way, whether it's because they're funny or because they're treated as people.

I prefer the latter, though, so I tend to treat my antagonists like heroes*

, just on the other side, and not at the beginning of their journeys when you first meet them. Ideally, they'd have a goal you can sympathise with, character growth*

^{You're probably not going to see their self-doubts emphasised, though, unless it only strengthens their conviction.}

, friends, the ability to learn, and they obtain significant power through great effort. The protagonists just oppose this person for their own reasons (hopefully also quite reasonable). It's not that the antagonist got corrupted or anything, but just comes at things from a different viewpoint, and is perhaps willing to make greater sacrifices. Not only do the characters have to try to defeat the antagonist, then, but also must struggle with the idea that it might have merit. This is possibly actually less realistic than them trying to demonise each other and taking a note from internet "debates", but it makes for a more interesting story, and the antagonist can be thoroughly threatening and effective when treated as the person who, in another story, would probably win.

Barring that (since antagonists aren't quite villains and everything), there are a few things that make actual(ish) villainy interesting. A more extreme Well-Intentioned Extremist works just as well, but doesn't raise questions in the same way. A (former) personal relationship with the protagonist appeals, if only because it hurts the protagonist more. I rather like the Tragic Villain, but that and the woobie villains are less likely to ring true if their actions reach a sufficiently terrible scale; still, good for wringing sympathy from an audience.

Which still draws on the same principles, admittedly. Dropping the pretense of that, and making a villain completely inhuman works better for me as a reader, sometimes, though I can't quite write it. Complete Monsters have to draw me in based solely on the flashiness of their actions and entertainment from their dialogue, which is quite hit-or-miss, though, and I can't take a Card-Carrying Villain seriously. If done well, I might think them entertaining, but they don't really draw me in, so I'd forget about them as soon as the next shiny thing comes along.

Charisma and charm always help, and work well with both heroic and villainous traits. Faux and true Affably Evil villains tend to make themselves likeable and entertaining without sacrificing whatever evils they do, and this can also be used to highlight/contrast their atrocities if seriousness needs to be brought in, with the added bonus of making them creepy.

In any case, they of course need to be competent, and even in the case of nearly being heroes, they should be legitimately threatening. A good villain, I think, should be able to inspire at least a little bit of terror.

Could be individuals or factions involved - well, I like having multiple antagonists in general but focus on one or very few, but if things are a bit less personal and more about the actual threat the villain poses, multiple competent villains can help a lot.

edited 5th Nov '11 12:32:32 AM by greedling

You will not go to space today.

I mostly agree with greedling. I like villains who are really no worse than the heroes themselves, and have just different opinions. I tend to forget cartoonish card-carrying villains quite easily because, well, they usually don't have much going for them.

On a more personal note, I've found I really like honourable villains. People who understand and respect the hero, don't fall into Evil Gloating mode and always honour their deals, even if it's not the optimal strategy for them.

I don't think it's necessary for a villain to be complex to be awesome. A villain who is just likable, despite his evilness I think also works very well. The two types accomplish different things I think.

I really want to write a creepy villain. Like Legato Bluesummers status creepy, but I never have so I'm a bit hesitant. Anyone have any advice?

edited 7th Nov '11 5:50:30 PM by NoirGrimoir

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

One who gets stuff done even if he/she doesn't win in the end. There's nothing more pathetic from a writing angle than the Harmless Villain.

What makes a given antagonist unsettling tends to lie most strongly, I think, with the way that they react in relation to what they do. Here are three that I find particularly effective:

1. Realistic sadism. Sure, a villain can be a giggling psychopath that takes ludicrous glee in acts of evil, but that often comes off as cartoonish rather than terrifying. It's far more uncomfortable, in my own experience, to observe a character quietly take pleasure in what they do. An out-of-place smile, an intent stare, an amused or satisfied tone in the voice: These are frightening.
2. Total indifference or boredom. Emotion is powerful humanising quality, even if, as in the case of the sadist, the emotion is repellant. The expression of a given feeling is relatable, and gives the reader something to hold onto even in the midst of complete mayhem. Remove this, and the character immediately becomes vastly more alienating as an antagonist.
3. Serenity. This is not so much a lack of emotion as a total peace with what they are doing regardless of personal feelings. For example, such a character might normally consider murder vile but, given the circumstances, will kill without mercy or remorse because that is what they "must" do, and so hold no qualms thereof. To most people, such a disconnect is thoroughly unnerving.

In the end each of the above is about one thing: Wrongness. If something about an otherwise externally ordinary character is fundamentally contrary to normal emotional and psychological function on a deep and abiding level, then they are usually at least somewhat creepy.

I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.

I prefer the term "antagonist," and I like them humane and with virtues as well as flaws.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

An antagonist is not a villain, the villain is just usually the antagonist in a story.

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

Villains should seen threatening to the heroes and thus capable of getting shit done one way or another. I'm a huge advocate of making both the 'heroes' and 'villains' have equally valid points, because otherwise, the villain will simply seem stupid and nonthreatening to me.

"Jack, you have debauched my sloth."

Man, so much hate for straight villains. I don't think it's necessary for a Villain to not be completely evil, but I do think in such cases where a villain is completely evil, it can add more interest for him to be strangely likeable or just plain cool. Our hesitancy to wan him to die doesn't have to just come from the fact that he has some good points, it can also come from the fact that he's just that awesome.

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

I think that's a pretty good point. YMMV on how much people will appreciate that type of villain, but I can definitely see the appeal. Admittedly, I've yet to write that type of villain, but I do have some ideas I'd like to get jotted done some day.

I think that what makes an awesome villain is one who's a major contradiction of the main character — the dark side of the hero, more or less. Similar backstories, save for one definitive event; similar skill sets begging for an epic clash; ideals that are eerily similar, but divided enough to define who's the hero and who's the villain...potentially. A villain who's essentially you on a bad day is definitely the kind of guy that any reader wouldn't want to face, IMO.

At any rate, I'd really like to start introducing a Complete Monster or two into my stuff; since I like to make my heroes likable (if riddled with faults), it makes sense for me to make villains who are irredeemable bastards that readers would want to see flayed. We'll see how well that goes...

edited 5th Nov '11 5:15:38 PM by Voltech44

My Wattpad — A haven for delightful degeneracy

Well, I don't really have heroes or villains. I have protagonists and antagonists.

I don't really have a specific process. I just throw them into the blender until they are neither strawmen nor card-carrying villains (unless I'm doing something absurd), and I try to make them human.

I am now known as Flyboy.

"An antagonist is not a villain, the villain is just usually the antagonist in a story."

I'm aware of that. I don't think the concept of a villain reflects reality, hence why I would not have one in the first place.

And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?

Depending on the story, I try either JHM's approach or Greedling's approach. (Occasionally, I write a JHM-style villain who thinks she's the first type of villain Greedling mentioned—for instance, a The Scourge of God villain who acknowledges her own moral weaknesses, and who tries with some success to encourage her victims to "repent" and fight against sin alongside her.)

edited 5th Nov '11 5:35:00 PM by feotakahari

That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful

Straight villains might carry me through the book, but if I ever have reason to put the book down, that villain isn't going to convince me to pick it back up.

I might like JHM-style villains, but I'd more likely want them included alongside a sufficiently human antagonist, or have the protagonists have other reasons to doubt what they're doing. I tend to regard them as more of an opposing force than an opposing character, I suppose. Regardless of how much awesome/amusing dialogue there is, the villain is just the last obstacle to be surmounted. I prefer people pitted against each other, so if an opposing force is all there is, the human conflict would have to arise within the protagonists instead. And I can already have that.

Since my goal is ultimately to stuff varied kinds of Emotional Torque into the story, these are the things I mainly have to consider. Fun, light reads don't, or things that go for horror or something, and while those are exactly the stories I don't remember for long, it's perfectly legitimate to aim for that.

You will not go to space today.

Depends on what I'm going for. Generally, I write my Big Bad to be totally unlikable. Someone you won't forgive. Very effective, usually immoral, everything the protagonist would be against. Minor villains slide around, ranging from quirky to dead serious. Most of the time they just have to be funny. I can't make a villain that you never laugh at, unless they're the aforementioned Big Bad and aren't supposed to be taken lightly.

I'm pretty sure the concept of Law having limits was a translation error. -Wanderlustwarrior

Either shades of gray or glamorous evil. Dark Action Girl, anyone?

I think it's actually good to have multiple villains in a story. I think different types of villains support different themes. Anti Villains introduce questions of what is right and what is wrong and how to apportion justice and mercy. Straight villains make you question the abilities of goodness to overcome evil, and can be used to suggest that evil is in all of us. Villains who are relatives, friends or lovers make you question how much love and blood relations should factor into handing out justice.

So I thing it really depends what kind of themes you want to explore. I think the more types you have the more themes you can look at.

SPATULA, Supporters of Page Altering To Urgently Lead to Amelioration (supports not going through TRS for tweaks and minor improvements.)

Although with my writing attitude, it's more like choosing themes to fit the villain then villains to fit the theme, that's otherwise pretty much how I feel.