Where Does MARVEL Take Its Villains From Here? Part I

A good story needs good characters, which includes someone we can support (the protagonist), and someone we can oppose (the antagonist). Sometimes, however, we find ourselves conflicted and sympathizing with the enemy. There is no doubt that the most engaging stories have a villain who is complex and layered. Audiences have become oversaturated and, quite frankly, bored with the concept of a villain who is just “evil” and desires world domination.
 
What truly makes a villain stimulating is their motive. In a few cases, it is their lack of a clear motive that garners interest. This is illustrated beautifully in The Dark Knight (2008), with many people scratching their heads as to what exactly Heath Ledger’s Joker wants — as Batman’s loyal butler puts it: “some men aren’t looking for anything logical”.
 
Marvel has introduced several villains in their films throughout the years, and for the most part these have been very hit-and-miss. Most of them are unique, not only in their appearance but also in their motives and desires. But with so many villains scratched off the roster, one might wonder how Marvel would avoid repetition in their upcoming stories, seeing as they have about 20 more films planned for after Avengers 4.
 
Let us take a look at the different villains Marvel has presented over the years and analyze their motives to see what’s been done and hypothesize what could be done later.
 


Here is an example of a classic story-telling device: an envious character (usually a relative of the hero/current king) aspires for the throne because they feel that they would be a better ruler, or simply crave the power that royalty brings. This has been used in a number of films and plays, most noticeably in The Lion King (1994), which takes several elements (this being one of them) from Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
 
The MCU has integrated this into their stories, as well. Both Loki and Killmonger are relatives to the actual heirs to the throne; the former is the adopted brother of Thor, while the latter is the estranged cousin of T’Challa. Both characters wanted to be king and were even successful for a period of time. However, they differed on their true motives for coveting the throne: Loki had this undying lust for power and ruling, whereas Killmonger was fed up with the oppression that blacks were enduring worldwide and wanted to use Wakanda’s resources to bring about a revolution of sorts. Killmonger’s cause had much depth and would have been interesting to explore further in future films, were it not for his untimely death. Loki, on the other hand, simply enjoyed the title of king — evident by him (albeit disguised as Odin) relaxing and slacking off in Thor: Ragnarok (2017), with complete disregard for the chaos the Nine Realms were thrown into.
 
Despite their differences, both characters are similar in that they have impressive emotional complexity and layers. Both Loki and Killmonger are orphans, who felt a tremendous amount of unresolved pain and rejection: in the first Thor film, Loki tearfully asks Odin if he is the monster parents tell their children about at night; during their final battle, Killmonger exclaims to T’Challa that the world had taken everything away from him.
   
Ultimately, however, both characters were defeated by the true heirs and stripped of their title. With this idea having been used twice now, one could argue that it would be wise for Marvel not to go down this route again.
 

   
Sometimes, the villain is not looking to take over the world. Sometimes, the villain just hates the hero — perhaps out of jealousy, revenge, personal insecurity, or family drama. Several MCU films have integrated this plot into their movies, most noticeably in the Iron Man movies: Obadiah Stane, Justin Hammer, Whiplash, and even Aldrich Killian — all men who resented Tony Stark and wanted to destroy him for various reasons.
 
Stane was a character who was not very well explored in Iron Man (2008). His motivation for hating Tony seems to be jealousy and greed, while simply desperate to take over Stark Industries. This becomes especially evident when Tony announces that the company is retiring from the weapons manufacturing business and discovers the arc reactor and Iron Man suit. As he states during their final encounter: “I’ve built this company from nothing! Nothing's gonna stand in my way – least of all, you!” Similarly, Justin Hammer’s detestation for Tony arises from envy and insecurity, going so far as to ally with Whiplash in an attempt to exceed and humiliate him — Whiplash himself has his own personal vendetta against Tony, stemming from their father’s feud in the past. Add Aldrich Killian to the list as yet another business man who loathes Tony for a past encounter.
   
Outside of the Iron Man movies, this plot component has been used in The Incredible Hulk (2008) and even Ant-Man (2015). Emil Blonsky becomes obsessed with taking down the Hulk. He craved the power and strength the latter had, even going so far as to injecting Banner’s blood into himself and completely disregarding any potential consequences. Darren Cross, in the first Ant-Man film, loathed Hank Pym and sought his technology, which resulted in him designing his own version of the Ant-Man suit as the Yellowjacket.
 
It should be noted that while all these villains personally despised the protagonist (or secondary protagonist), they also desired the hero’s technology — several of these villains ended up crafting their own versions: Stane built the Iron Monger; Whiplash designed a similar suit with electrical appendages; Blonsky became the Abomination; and Cross created the Yellowjacket.
 
In fact, the concept of the villain using similar technology to fight the hero has been tried time and time again in the MCU. The latest example was in Black Panther (2018), where Killmonger acquired the Golden Jaguar suit and fought T’Challa in his Black Panther mantle. Many audiences find it repetitive and in order for Marvel to keep their stories engaging and exciting, it would be wise to avoid this kind of narrative for a while. Nevertheless, the villain having a personal vendetta against the hero may work (in some cases, it works perfectly) if their motives are interesting or relatable enough. This is exemplified very well in Helmut Zemo.
     
Captain America: Civil War (2016) is arguably one of the best movies in the MCU. Despite a large number of characters and several complex plot lines, the film succeeds brilliantly and doesn’t feel too contrived or excessively complicated. At its most basic, the villain here simply hates the Avengers. Delving further in, one realizes that Zemo has almost as much emotional depth and layers as Loki and Killmonger. He isn’t motivated by greed or power — rather, he is angry and blames the Avengers for the loss of his family during Ultron’s attack on Sokovia.
 
This is a perfect example of how, sometimes, heroes create their own villains. Zemo seemed like a fine citizen before the attack, a man who treasured and cherished his family; a loving husband and father. When he lost everything, he didn’t blame the ones directly responsible (Ultron and his army). Instead, he went after the Avengers and reasoned that their inaction to save his family (or perhaps their actions that caused Ultron’s creation in the first place) was the reason he lost everything. He was hurt, broken, and, quite simply, desperate to avenge his loved ones.
 
Perhaps what is even more fascinating is that he himself is not seeking to land any direct blows on the team. He would rather tear the Avengers apart internally, as he states: “I knew I couldn't kill them. More powerful men than me have tried. But if I could get them to kill each other…” Furthermore, despite his plan being a little convoluted, he (somewhat) succeeds — by the end of the film, the Avengers are broken up, with long-lasting consequences carried well into Avengers: Infinity War (2018).
   
Zemo stands out from the previous villains with a vendetta in that he is not motivated by greed; he does not want financial or corporate success, as Stane and Hammer do; nor does he lust physical strength and power, as Blonsky does. Zemo does not even acquire superpowers or similar technology — he is simply a man, a colonel with intelligence training, at best. Furthermore, he is not solely after one hero; his dispute is with the entire team. Personally, I think that Zemo is one of the best villains Marvel has brought out, and hope that he will appear in future films, considering that he was not killed off like so many others.
 
Next time, we take a look at few more villains with their individual motivations — from Ronan the Accuser and his never-ending hunger for Xandar’s destruction; to the more conflicted Winter Soldier, and whether or not he actually comes under the category of antagonist. And, of course, let us not forget the big man himself:


 
What do you think of Marvel’s villain roster? How will you think character motives will change in the future? Discuss in the comments section below!