Board 8 > Scarlet Ranks 225 User-Nominated Super-Villains

(+) Yeah! (+)

To me it's like "asshole makes asshole decisions and I'm supposed to care about this."

Like I said I like watching heroes do stuff, and be foiled by interesting dynamics. I couldn't care about anyone on that show. I've watched shows where bad guys were compelling but walter white...meh
---

Do you watch House of Cards?
---

I've seen the first two seasons, need to binge watch it sometime.
---

I'm already trying to anticipate my next nom. I kind of think he's not really remarkable in the greater canon but I had a special attachment to that character as I grew up so I put him in this
---

#200 - Annisia Nominated by: Eddv
First Appearance: Red Sonja #1 (Jul. 2013)
Created by: Gail Simone

Fundamentals: 5/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

Welcome to the first character about which I don't know anything. I'm not a big Swords and Sorcery reader; I'm more of a conservative superhero-reader, so villains from other titles that aren't critically acclaimed as "MUST-READs" hardly ever cross my radar. Too much to do, so little time. But I can't imagine I would enjoy this character much as I've never been enticed to read much in the way of Conanverse material.

Sorry, you got shafted on a write-up.
---

#199 - Doctor Sivana (Thaddeus Sivana) Nominated by: Gundammike
First Appearance: Whiz Comics #2 (1940)
Created by: Bill Parker and C.C. Beck

Fundamentals: 6/10
Track Record: 4/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

For the purposes of this write-up, Multiversity is not being taken into account here.

Dr. Sivana is a product of the Golden Age, and as such, he has a strong message at play that is thwarted by simply being poorly written for most of the height of his career. A classic mad scientist, the problem with Sivana is that he was never given that unique edge to take him out of the archetype. His voice is generic and quite honestly unambitious; too often Sivana's plots are the B-plots to someone else's A-plot. Hell, even in Power of Shazam! that's the case. Probably the story that I find the most telling in regards to Sivana is 52. Here's a story that takes Captain Marvel's two main foes and plops them down together at dinner. Sivana has this unique family that is wildly more interesting than him meeting with the Black Adam family, also wildly more interesting than him. In his basement is a superhero wildly more interesting than him, and during dessert they are attacked by a beast that is wildly more interesting than him.

The point is, unique voices trump generic concepts.

I've never been impressed with Johns' take on Sivana either. As much as I think Johns breathed some fresh air into Captain Marvel (although Giffen is the best at Billy Batson), I don't think there's any real vision for Sivana, and that's because Sivana has no schtick that differentiates himself from the masses.
---

#198 - Steve Rogers Nominated by: Johnbobb
First Appearance: Captain America Comics #1 (Mar. 1941)
Created by: Joe Simon and Jack Kirby

Fundamentals: 6/10
Track Record: 3/10
Scarlet Factor: 3/10

I love a good hero-gone-bad storyline. When you do it right, you can really explore the gray area of morality, the breaking point of any individual, or just the unpredictable nature of humanity.

So what has Steve Rogers allowed writers and readers to explore as a villain?

Nothing.

The stories are skin deep at best. He's a bad guy only because of a mindwipe situation (Zatanna, line one... Zatanna, line one). It doesn't really do much for any reader when you know the exact whys and wherefores of a situation. Instead of watching a logical deterioration like Hal Jordan or a surprise flippie like Nightwing, we're forced to sit through something contrived. And when it's Captain America, this should be a big deal, a great exploration and referendum on America. We're not getting that. Instead, we've gotten schlock. No one wants schlock. We want good comics.
---

#197 - Lord of the Locusts Nominated by: Gundammike
First Appearance: Bone: Eyes of the Storm (Nov. 1996)
Created by: Jeff Smith
(never pictured)
Fundamentals: 7/10
Track Record: 2/10
Scarlet Factor: 3/10

It's been a long time since I've read Bone. I'll likely never read it again; it's masterful storytelling, but just a genre in which I don't have a lot interest. As an unseen protagonist in the vein of a Blofeld or a Dr. Claw, Lord of the Locusts is well-crafted, but generally speaking I tend to not care that much about them. I think you only ever see a pair of glowing eyes, hardly lending much to what LotL's actual appearance is like.

Bone is a great story that I would recommend, but it's been so long that I really don't have much recollection of what else is notable about LotL. And that's probably a bad sign. If I don't remember you, you must not have done much of note.
---

#196 - Jezebel Jet Nominated by: Jesse
First Appearance: Batman #656 (Oct. 2006)
Created by: Grant Morrison and Andy Kubert

Fundamentals: 3/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

Jezebel Jet didn't do much at all. She was supposedly a love interest of Bruce Wayne. She betrayed him, she died, and no one cared because Simon Hurt was much more interesting.

The End
---

Can't argue with your write-up for Jezebel, I was looking for someone out of the ordinary to nominate and curious if there was any more to her than I noticed. Apparently not!

Is Dr. Sivana really just a generic mad scientist? What's his goal?
---

hail hydra
---

He hates Captain Marvel! So he does... stuff!
---

Tagging this even though I missed noms-- suspect everything I would've bothered to nominate is here though. Don't really have many pet comic book villains most of the ones I like are pretty mainstream.

Unless Hobgoblin wasn't nominated. Tell me someone nominated Hobgoblin. (I'm not saying he's obscure but he isn't a gimme nomination)
---

I nominated the Jason Macendale version.
---

I guess that'll have to do

Course if both he and Kingsley are there even better
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

He hates Captain Marvel! So he does... stuff!

I remember him appearing in... either Teen Titans or Outsiders. I think Outsiders. I think he was trying to blow shit up so he could go on a vacation. He was boring.
---

Didn't Sivana marry the queen of Venus or something?
---

Speaking of Dr Sivana, who's your favorite/top evil "Dr." in the DC canon. It just seems like every single one of them has become a mad scientist at this pt
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Corrik posted...

scarletspeed7 posted...

Your list was very much like the Sesame Street segment "One of these things is not like the others".

It was Lady Savitar or him for the last spot.

I actually like Christian a lot! She would have been a good nomination.

Oh
---

Oh (Secret Empire #3 spoilers)


This will please Johnbobb at least
---

Reminder this is a day I'm off work, so no updates.
---

so that's what happens when you spoiler an embedded imgur picture
---

bump to live
---

#197 - Dark Phoenix (Jean Grey) Nominated by: BetrayedTangy
First Appearance: X-Men #1 (Dec. 1963)
Created by: Stan Lee and Jack Kirby

Fundamentals: 7/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

Dark Phoenix is a great, defining example of bad writing. And I'm not talking about the spiral of Jean Grey into Dark Phoenix and her subsequent sacrifice; that's about the best plotting you will ever get from Jean Grey. But that story is a double-edged sword, and we all need to have a bit of a sit-down, a bit of a chat, a bit of a coffee talk about this whole situation.

When you send a character on a completely redefining swan song, it should be just that. This character can't come back; this character can't get a do-over. When you tell seminal classic, let it be that. You don't see Watchmen hanging around still. You don't see Frank Miller still telling Dark Knight stories.

Okay, scratch that. Let me go back and try again.

Jean Grey's villainous role was so successful because it fit the character well, was built for a long period of time time, climaxed in a fantastically plotted story (note that I'm not saying fantastically written; sometime we'll have to come back to the dearth of good dialogue that is Chris Claremont), and resulted in a story with some meaning and impact.

So naturally we had to go back and keep telling it over and over.

I'll give you one (1/I) resurrection for a character named Phoenix. Just the one. But that's it. At that point, it's time to tell new stories, and not rehash old ones. You can't constantly reiterate the story of the crazed human turned goddess who needs to be put down. There has to be evolution, change, and sensical storytelling. But this is X-Men, so you can get, at best one of those. And it's not evolution or sensical storytelling.

Jean Grey is a good idea hammered to death, resulting in one of the worst Marvel characters in history.
---

Aside from Whedon's run, I didn't read much in the way of X-Men after Morrison's run ended. Did they wind up bringing her back again after that?

Yes.

I mean, did I really have to answer that?
---

I mean I figured they did, I was more curious about how they went about it this time, if it was something more than her just being back. But I can google it.

scarletspeed7 posted...

You don't see Watchmen hanging around still. You don't see Frank Miller still telling Dark Knight stories.

Okay, scratch that. Let me go back and try again.

XD this was great
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Yes.

I mean, did I really have to answer that?

Well, did they bring back the Jean Grey who died in Morrison's run? I'm aware of the Phoenix crossover event, and Teen Jean Grey, but I think original Jean is still dead, right? Or at least ascended?
---

Jesse_Custer posted...

I mean I figured they did, I was more curious about how they went about it this time, if it was something more than her just being back. But I can google it.

She's shown up a lot as "psychic manifestations" and then there's the time-lost original Jean Grey again.
---

Oh, I knew about the young versions of the characters, but yeah, I was thinking of resolution of Morrison's storyline.

Jesse_Custer posted...

Oh, I knew about the young versions of the characters, but yeah, I was thinking of resolution of Morrison's storyline.

Yeah, just psychic manifestations of her. Which means she'll be back. Again.
---

#194 - Pyro (St. John Allerdyce)Nominated by: Johnbobb
First Appearance: Uncanny X-Men #141 (Jan. 1981)
Created by: Chris Claremont and John Byrne

Fundamentals: 5/10
Track Record: 6/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

I don't understand how such a wholly unoriginal, unremarkable character has been given leave to bore audiences for so long in so many ways. He was a rip-off cribbed straight from Stephen King's The Stand given life as a much less interesting mutant in the Claremont run, and he quite frankly made the Firefly look positively thrilling in comparison. His costume was the height of ludicrous and ugly; this, of course, made him a prime candidate for Marvel's first rip-off of the Suicide Squad (the Freedom Force). This team bombed with the fans and Pyro went back to being wholly uninteresting.

Eventually he got killed off with X-Aids and no one has cared since. Pyro is boring, redundant and only ever had artificial development in lieu of being a real character. Kind of like most X-characters.
---

#193 - Sabretooth (Victor Creed) Nominated by: MarquessLess
First Appearance: Iron Fist #14 (Aug. 1977)
Created by: Chris Claremont and John Byrne

Fundamentals: 6/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 2/10

Victor Creed has a solid (but not spectacular design). Tied together well on a predatory animalistic theme, Sabretooth really isn't a pleasure to look at, nor is he a character with much versatility. However, he gets the job done. He's serviceable. You can just throw him into a story and his personality and behavior will remain intact because this is a simple character with which to write.

So why does he rank relatively low on this list? Aside from a host of great characters crowded at the top, the answer is summed up well with this request:

Name a great Sabretooth story.

Go on. I'll give you time.

You can't say Age of Apocalypse. That's an alternate Sabretooth. Can't say Exiles for the same reason. You gotta stick to the one and only 616 Sabretooth.

...

That silence? That's you realizing that Sabretooth has a glass ceiling. He's just a mediocre character. He's been pushed to high hell, of course. But that doesn't change the fact that this is a character that can't really be a function of true storytelling. The sort of storytelling where you can be introspective, where you can learn something about yourself, where you can explore your relationship with the world around you. That's what a good myth does, and comics are myths at their cores. Sabretooth is essentially a Nessus; a big ol' threat that isn't really relevant to the moral at hand. He's purposely created as a pawn to move around the board so real storytelling can be done. And when there's no real storytelling being done, it's all about writing filler issues. And most of X-Men is filler.

If you like Sabretooth, that's fine. But his existence is to fill pages while we wait for the real writers to show up and tell real stories.
---

Age of Apocalypse really was the only time I gave a shit about Sabertooth, but as you said, it's an alternate version.

He was a good idea to be an anti-Wolverine, but yeah. He's more like your not-so-schoolyard-bully. Just there to be commanded by smarter villains and used to create diversions or occupy Wolverine for all I care. Not much of anything.
---

The recent Sabretooth developments haven't been bad but he can be a character that's "just there" at times.
---

Let's be clear. I'm not saying there are many bad stories with Sabretooth. I'm just saying there are no great ones.
---

#192 - Doomsday Nominated by: WalkingWiki
First Appearance: Superman: The Man of Steel #17 (Nov. 1992)
Created by: Dan Jurgens, Brett Breeding, Jerry Ordway, Louise Simonson, Roger Stern

Fundamentals: 5/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 3/10

You can't make a great character by committee. Sure you can tell a big story or a new story by committee. But you can't tell a truly great one. Doomsday's run in Death of Superman is a perfect example of that. I know that there are people who like Doomsday, but for the life of me, I cannot understand why. There's nothing inside of Doomsday. There's no real heart. There's no complexity. There's no appearance that is deceived. You get what you see. A large, grunting brutish creature.

Superman's death was notable and entertaining for what it was, but let's not pretend it was great. You could have made Doomsday a golden knight or a winged angel or a demonic reaper and the outcome would have been the same. Doomsday is a placeholder - and great at it - but he falls into the same category as Sabretooth. The difference is that the writers make no bones about it. They know what Doomsday can do. They know his role. Doomsday is never presented as anything but exactly what he is, and for that he ranks slightly higher than Sabretooth.
---

Doomsday was never a complex character, but I thought the development of his origin was interesting where he kept evolving or whatever (been awhile since I read it, but I remember liking it).

#191 - White Canary Nominated by: Snake
First Appearance: Birds of Prey #83 (Jun 2005)
Created by: Gail Simone and Ed Benes

Fundamentals: 6/10
Track Record: 4/10
Scarlet Factor: 3/10

Designed to be an arch-nemesis for Black Canary, it would have been better for everyone involved if White Canary had been presented in Cassandra Cain's Batgirl series or Ra's al Ghul storyline. She was woefully misused as an antagonist for the Birds of Prey, immediately disappearing after a year of story arcs. There's not a lot to her. She hates Black Canary. That is, of course, a functional foundation for a primary antagonist, but not a very interesting one if it isn't developed.

White Canary could have been developed and perhaps would have been, but she wasn't because she didn't have the opportunity. Trying to kick off a career in a team title means you share screentime with 8 or 10 other people in every issue, and that can be a heavy anchor when you're trying to swim to the top.

White Canary has potential, but she did nothing and now she's gone.

The End
---

bump
---

scarletspeed7 posted...

Name a great Sabretooth story.

Mutant Massacre
http://www.cbr.com/month-of-cool-avengersx-men-comic-book-moments-psylockes-first-run-in-with-sabretooth/

I also enjoyed the bit of '90s Sabretooth where he's held captive and "braindead" in the mansion and Boom Boom's taking care of him
---

#190 - Flag-Smasher (Karl Morgenthau) Nominated by: Mega Mana
First Appearance: Captain America #312 (Dec. 1985)
Created by: Mark Gruenwald and Paul Neary

Fundamentals: 5/10
Track Record: 4/10
Scarlet Factor: 4/10

One aspect of villainy I tend to like is when a character's personality is tied together very tightly. That's Flag-Smasher in a nutshell. Sure, he has a very bland design. Sure, his plans never reach the level of consequence that a man of his demeanor and desire should. But over time, as is the problem with every fucking B-List Marvel villain, his original intent is lost as Marvel tends to screw over characters that "don't matter" as they push characters they like. Hell, the guy ends up getting an off-screen kill so Cable can do boring Cable things. I hate shit like this.

Flag-Smasher set himself up to be the leader of a small foil to SHIELD in a lot of ways, and his belief that nationalism should be crushed was an excellent foil for Captain America. So naturally he had to tangle with everyone that wasn't Captain America in the Captain America title before he had been so thoroughly trashed with nonsense side stories (including a weird plotline in Antarctica where he gained super powers) that you couldn't find the original character within this garbled mess of continuity.

Wasted potential is often what leads to the plaintive cry of fans. A perfect example is the 90s Bloodlines storyline from DC, where DC pushed a linewide intiative to create new characters. But none of these characters really were given a fair shake (except one minor exception and one major exception), and the event is regarded as a failure. It's not the debut, it's the follow-up. It's that successive execution that kills characters. This is a perfect example of that. By the time Marvel decided to make Flag-Smasher a legacy character, the name had been so terrible tarnished that it was more of a handicap than a benefit to the second Flag-Smasher.
---

Who's the other exception aside from Tony?
---

i would assume Argus as the minor exception. And you meant Tommy right?
---

Anima and Tommy.
---

#198 - Atrocitus Nominated by: SgtSphynx
First Appearance: Green Lantern #25 (Dec. 2007)
Created by: Geoff Johns and Ethan Van Sciver

Fundamentals: 5/10
Track Record: 4/10
Scarlet Factor: 4/10

God, this guy is so overrated. He's a being of rage. One-note. His origin is one-dimensional. His motivations are single-minded. His utilization of his powers is narrow in variety. Atrocitus just bores me to tears. He's a half-rate Hulk with no off switch.

I really can't speak much more to him than this. I don't see any value to storytelling with Atrocitus.
---

#188 - Superman (Injustice) Nominated by: trdl
First Appearance: Superman: Gods Among Us #1 (Mar. 2013)
Created by: Tom Taylor and Jeremy Rhapaack

Fundamentals: 3/10
Track Record: 5/10
Scarlet Factor: 5/10

Isn't the whole point of Superman that, while he can be fallible, he ISN'T corruptible? That's why Injustice is, on an elementary level, stupid. The base line for a character being wrecked in the name of creating these grimdark hard-edged alternate worlds... that's the sort of stupid that makes me slam Marvel so often. The essence, the soul of a character, is what brings the reader back. These foundations are how we tell deeper, more meaningful stories. But Injustice is the sort of fanfiction cloaked in the garb of a DC logo that I hate intensely.

When you look at the great Elseworlds, they dissect a character by putting them in a new sandbox and seeing how they interact. A perfect example is The Nail. What is a world without Superman? A world without leadership. A world without a central heroic figure behind which other heroes with more questionable origins and attitudes can hide, safe in the knowledge that the world will trust them implicitly thanks to having a beacon of hope, a paragon of virtue.

That's what Superman is meant to be. Because the question of "Must There Be a Superman?" isn't about morality - it's about destiny and humanity. When you question Superman's morality, when you make him weak, you've destroyed what makes the myth of Superman work. When you question Batman's desire for justice, you've broken the character. When you take Hal Jordan's utter self-confidence away from him, you're left with John Stewart. I mean, a terrible character.

Superman is Superman because that's the myth. That's what we as readers and storytellers need. Anyone could have been Superman in this story. You could have made a new character. But the compunction to make money, to leech off of a successful property at the expense of what makes that property successful is kitsch. It's the opposite of art. It's an abomination to real storytellers.
---