Villains in fiction

Post Reply New Topic

You'd probably serve yourself well opening yourself up to what NTs would have to say about this topic as well, rather than assuming they don't have anything to contribute. A lot of good villins were created by NTs. Surf the web - there's plenty of stuff.

Good villians in writing usually have three things in common:

1 - Villians aren't accidents in a story. They serve a purpose. And to do this, they must
follow a logic. It may not be the universal logic of the story, but some logic, even if it's solely their own. Like truly evil people in real life, a good villian often assumes he/she is the only one who knows the truth, and that their logic trumps the logic and common sense of the majority. So often times the villian's logic runs counterpoint to the logic of the protagonist.

2 - most great villians really are an elaboration, expansion and hyperbole of common human desires and experience, like revenge, greed, arrogance, pettiness, ambition, a need for approval, a need for validation, etc.. This makes them relatable and sympathetic to the reader.

3 - a level of mystery. By "mystery" I mean, some quality about them that seems to be just out of reach of our understanding. For example, we get why a villian might feel a need for revenge, if the writer exposes his logic well enough. But how does the villian become singlemindedly consumed with it, when anyone else would try to move past it and commit their energy to a broader variety of things? This is what we don't get, and we're not supposed to. It's just like we don't understand what drove someone like Ted Bundy, when it's such a common human experience to have a difficult family history and/to be rejected by a love interest, yet we don't all go on a psychotic serial killing spree. Evil, both in life and ficition, always has some degree of this kind of mystery.

I've been re-reading the Harry Potter books and I think Voldemort is a superbly crafted villian. He's not one-dimensional - he clearly has a logic he follows resolutely that runs counterpoint to the protagonists. Voldemort's logic esteem ambition, power and selfishness, while his protagonists (Harry, Dumbledore and friends) esteem courage, love and sacrifice. Rowling delves deep enough into Voldemort's formation as a villian to make not just the reader nearly feel pity for him, so does the main protagonist, Harry. When we learn he had a sad upbringing and we see he's a extremely gifted wizard whose talent is recognized by one of the "good guys' (Dumbledore), we feel we ought to root for him. We can understand why he might feel alienated and why he should deserve a "chance."

Yet, despite what the opportunities and options offered to him, Voldemort doesn't want acceptence, forgiveness or pity - what he clearly wants, as part of that resolute logic he has followed since his youth (and thoughout the series), is to be powerful. And not just any old sort of powerfulness either - powerfulness to point of immortality, to possess what any other person would logically deduce as madness. Somehow, in Voldemort's mind, becoming immortal and thus the most powerful wizard ever is the answer to all his wants and needs. So much so, he'd destroy his own soul for it. This is where Voldemort stops being that sympathetic hyperbole of common human experience, and begins to be a mystery of evil. That's classic villiany - a villian who is sympathetic right up to the fine line where he willfully crosses over and becomes evil, and in doing so simultaneously alienates and fascinates the reader.

A memorable villain is poetic and somewhat sentimental, and has a "moral" code by which he lives.

I think that's what separates a Sephiroth from a Kefka. Villains who are caricatural or completely delusional do not attract us in the same way as a bad guy who reminds us of ourselves with a twist. A good villain is like a beautiful portrait marred with a jagged gash. They remind us that we all have the capacity to do good or evil.

As we Christians are wont to say, "But for the grace of God, go I."

The interesting part of that clip from Galactica, besides showing how far Roslin's ethics deteriorated during that year on New Caprica, is that the moment in there was Baltar's last chance for redemption.

All he had to do was tell Roslin, "Yes, there was a woman on Caprica. Yes, I gave her access to my computer records. But as the Gods witness my words, I never dreamed of what would happen. I thought she was just a competitor, seeking an advantage in bidding for government contracts. Nobody knew then that Cylons could look human! I learned about my error on New Caprica, and believe me, it has haunted my dreams since that day. But I did not collude in the genocide of my own people!"

Sadly, his narcissism only let that last part escape his lips...

More on topic, I think part of what makes a villain memorable is, as noted above, that he does not think of himself as EEEEVIILLL!! Instead, those who oppose him are misguided, and the brutal crushing of all dissent is in their best interests, really...

I wrote somewhere up I don't like vilains, anyway I am thinking now if Neuromancer, the Gibson's character, is not a villain, my memory never let me remebes storyes I read in detail.

Is Gibson's Neuromancer a villain?

i think some villans are evil because something destroyed their lives when they were young
and they are mad at the world that is the cause, just look at supermans arch enemy, lex luthor. he lost all his hair when he was young and sworn revenge on the world and superman but them again superman could of just bought him a toupe and all the problems would have been solved.

Neuromancer and Wintermute weren't villains/a villain exactly, but Wintermute's desire to join them together to form a true AI was in violation of existing law (the Turing Protocol, setting a limit on the level of artificial intelligence permissible). In order to accomplish this goal, Wintermute was forced to do some things that might be considered villainous (like using that remote-controlled ultralight plane in Straylight to kill those two Turing cops so Case could escape), but the intelligence certainly didn't take any pleasure in them - they were simply logically required. And the bad things that Neuromancer did were actually in support of the Turing laws - mostly when it flatlined Case, trying to keep his consciousness in a lovely dream of the old days in Chiba City so that Case could die peacefully, and the two halves would remain separate.

When they were joined, the new intelligence didn't try to take over the world, or even cyberspace - it started thinking clearly, instead, and picked up a signal that probably came from another such 'Net-wide intelligence, around Alpha Centauri...

wow, I leave the thread for a little bit and it grows. thanks for all your points and opinions. Also Cade, I apologiser if I seem disrespectful of NT opinion, it's just that in my experience many NTs enjoy something without fully analyising and computing the formula for making something popular and enjoyable on a large scale. In fact my Idol as a writer is English journalist, film historian, critic and author Kim Newman, who shows a complex understanding of the basic principles of the success of popular horror and sci-fi fantasy stories and the success of both genres. If I should ever publish my writing, (which this thread was created as research), I would hope to send him a copy of my work for his professional critique.

One mans hero is another mans villain, just as one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. The french resistance were heroically fighting against the oppressive jackboot of the Nazi regime. Or alternatively they were a bunch of bomb throwing terrorists hell bent on disrupting the recognised government of a subject nation. Its all in the spin.

Classic villains are often as not merely the same as heroes, but taken a step further. Batman is a great villain. Dresses in black like a bloody great big bat, randomly attacks people based upon his own moral code, and lives in a big secret cave plotting all sorts of crimes (speeding, unauthorised flying, using all manner of offensive weapons and fully automatic machine guns he so isnt allowed to legally own). The fine line he mostly doesnt cross is actually killing people. Thats pretty much all that seperates him from the joker or riddler or whoever.

Darth Vader is a legitimate representative of the sovereign government across the galaxy, using all the resources at his disposal to capture and try the terrorists who keep blowing up Imperial Property in the name of some half remembered pseudo-religious cult. Also, he has possibly the greatest introduction of a villain in movie history. (Ignoring the daft prequels). He appears as a looming black figure against an all white background, and promptly throttles a rebel soldier. He could have been introduced in a big black scary setting, but it wouldnt be half as efficient.

Sauron never appears in the books at all, with only the briefest of cameos in the movies. Most of his evil is implied rather than obvious.. a looming shadow in the darkness, seeing all, but apparently doing very little directly. Gollum debatably is not actually a villain, but the hero of the whole piece, as without his intervention Frodo would have buggered up the whole plan. His schizoid nature is both amusing and disturbing, but entirely predictable given his extremely long isolation from social situations. (Sound familiar? I know I empathise better with Gollum than anyone else in the trilogy lol.)

Some villains work better than others merely because they have the correct motivation to be evil. Random bad guys who slaughter their cronies just because they are "eeeevil" arent very interesting. Bad guys who do it for the money and power (Alan Rickman as the Sheriff of Nottingham), or because of deepseated childhood trauma (Jason from Friday The Thirteenth) are much more interesting. Jason is a very frankenstein-like figure, almost tragic, much like his bolt-necked predecessor, terrifying because of his unstoppable nature, a characteristic of almost all villains to one degree or another. (After all, their never quite dead the first time, no matter what you do to them.)

The Cenobites, or more specifically Pinhead himself, are more worrying because of their implied ability to cause pain, and the disturbing implication that you might actually enjoy it. A lot of their menace comes about from well crafted dialogue as otherwise they are pretty much just goths with an S+M leaning.

More animalistic villains are scary and effective for a different reason. The Alien is more scary than the Predator because Predators work on a vaguely understandable human level. They are essentially big game hunters, and can be talked to, reasoned with even. The Alien however, with its little progenitor (the ambulatory penis that is the face hugger) cannot be reasoned with, debated with, or even controlled. Its just going to rip your face out, or impregnate you in a most brutal and rape-like fashion, and theres very little you can do about it.

Macbeth isnt a villain. Hes a tragic hero driven to insanity and murder by the machinations of cruel and malignant women. So there

Macbeth, very interesting reading

I'd like to add to your comment, that Predator is more likeable, one relates more to him because of his likeness to a human being, having a body that, with the mask on, looks and can be mistaken for human. This doesn't happen with the aliens, that, while also having a semi-human form, don't share any of the traits and behaviours that the Predators show.


I'd like to add another villain: The one that Gary Oldman plays in The Fifth Element: "Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg"
I loved it

also, another villain: Gary Oldman (again!) in Leon/The professional


Oh! and Leon himself is also a "villain"!

I like Junior Cain from the Book From the Corner of his Eye by Dean Koontz
I also like Juzo from Tenchu: Fatal shadows. He isn't even all that strong. He is just skilled.

I prefer villains that aren't just black and white. I like the ones with shades of gray. For example, Jud Fry in Oklahoma. During the song "Poor Jud is Daid" you actually feel sorry for him. It's the same in Mr. Brooks (hates being a killer), Batman and Robin (Freeze wants to cure his wife), and a number of other movies and books. My favorite villain of all time is Mayor Richard Wilkins III from season three of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. You learn to like him, despite the fact that he's a monster.

We mustn't forget the great villain at WP threads: Mr. NT!