Just For Fun: My Top Ten Villains

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

(NOTE: As with any such list, it's somewhat fluid; I might make it a
little different if I were to write this list today, but I'm leaving
this one as originally posted)


While, at least in theory, we cheer for the victory of the heroes, it
is often the villains that define a work, and certainly the villains
tend to get the best lines, best music, and commonly the coolest "style"
in a work.

This probably partly stems from the fact that villains are more "free"
than the heroes; they get to do what they want rather than what they
should or must. In addition, the villains tend to be in control, the
ACTIVE force, in the story, at least up until the end; the heroes spend
much of their time reacting rather than being directly active themselves.

Still, there are good villains, bad villains, and "meh" villains� and a
few, a very few, that stand out so much from the others that they say
"This is what you should aspire to, if you seek to be on the side of
evil. Look, and see what a true VILLAIN can be!"

So I herewith present a list of my top ten villains from various forms
of fiction!


Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton
E. P. Arnold Royalton, almost always referred to simply as "Mr.
Royalton", is the head of Royalton Industries in the movie version of
Speed Racer. Played with scenery-chewing relish by Roger Allam, Royalton
is a powerful and wealthy industrialist who has no conscience nor pity
for any below him. He believes wholeheartedly in the dog-eat-dog world
of corporate warfare � not merely wholeheartedly, but passionately
preaching the gospel of the corporate game: "That's what racing is
about. It has nothing to do with cars or drivers. All that matters is
power, and the unassailable might of money!"

One of only two "normal humans" on this list, Royalton wouldn't be
nearly so fun a villain if he weren't capable of wearing a convincing
mask, and wear it he can. Even though we know he has to be a bad guy, he
seems to be the ideal of the corporate man � one who climbed from
nothing to the top, and yet remembers what it's like to be at the bottom
� perhaps a bit overeager to impress, but then, many at the top are. The
moment when Royalton tears off that mask is actually quite horrifying;
it is a very Jekyll-and-Hyde moment, and Speed's utter shock resonates
with us.

Royalton demonstrates the pitilessness and vicious nature of evil �
and, ultimately, its pettiness.

Number 9: Prince Koura
There's something about an evil sorcerer that's hard to beat for a
villain, and The Golden Voyage of Sinbad offers us one of the best:
Prince Koura, nobleman, visionary, and master of the blackest arts of
magic, after a mystical prize which can grant the wearer youth, a crown
of untold riches, and a shield of darkness. Played magnificently by Tom
Baker (who later became famous as the fourth incarnation of The Doctor),
Koura is not merely powerful but intelligent, skilled, and physically
quite competent as well.

Koura's primary magic is the ability to bring the unliving to life,
ranging from creating a homonculous from his own blood to serve as a spy
to animating a multi-armed statue of Kali and sending it against his
foes. He uses it only reluctantly, however, because the use of magic
quite literally drains the life out of him; he ages noticeably after
each significant feat of magic. This shows, also, his tenacity and
dedication to his mission; he is willing to risk his own life to achieve
this goal, and does so repeatedly.

At the same time, Koura shows us something very rare in true villains.
He has a servant and companion, Achmed, who repeatedly tries to dissuade
Koura from continuing the quest, or failing that to at least refrain
from the use of his magic. Koura shows that he appreciates Achmed's
concern and the basic wisdom of his advice; moreover, when the climactic
confrontation is approaching, he sends Achmed to safety, not wanting to
risk his life as well. This consideration and understanding that ones'
servants should be well treated is a startling and gratifying feature in
one otherwise so dark; it shows a much greater intelligence than most
bad guys are allowed to have.

Prince Koura also is quite willing to face people physically; he shows
himself to be roughly equal to Sinbad himself in swordsmanship, and had
he not become overconfident, the movie would have had a much darker
ending! The combination puts him here, at number nine!

Number 8: Ellsworth Toohey
The second of the two "normal humans" on this list, Ellsworth Toohey is
the main villain in Ayn Rand's novel The Fountainhead. Overall, The
Fountainhead is in my view not as good a novel as Atlas Shrugged or her
much shorter work Anthem. None of the main characters are as likeable
as, say, Hank Rearden, and their motives/personalities are more
difficult to understand. Perhaps the most likeable of them is the
non-villain antagonist Gail Wynand.

But despite the less-impressive nature of the book as a whole, Rand's
depiction of Toohey is spectacularly creepy. Toohey is, in modern terms,
an extremely high-functioning sociopath; a classical weak,
glasses-wearing, bullied geek as a child, Toohey has focused his genius
(and he is, indeed, a genius) on learning how to manipulate people. He
could, of course, use this talent to improve people's lives, drive
people towards the areas they will most excel in, and generally be a
force for good.

Instead, Ellsworth Toohey focuses on manipulation through subtle
destruction. He uses poisoned versions of classic therapy and group
dynamics to undermine confidence where it is justified, and build it up
where it is not; he encourages the glorification of the incompetent and
the destruction of competence wherever he finds it. He does this on
small scales (watching his careful and precise demolition of everyone in
his circle of "friends" is horrific) and on large scales, setting events
in motion which are intended to destroy huge corporations � or
individuals who normally are considered powerful and capable.

As the villain, Toohey eventually "gets his" � in what I think of as
one of the most understated Moments of Awesome ever written � but it is
something of a Pyrrhic victory, because the cost to shut him down is
immense. It does not begin to make up for the damage he has done, and it
isn't clear that he will not be able to start his venomous manipulations
up again somewhere else.

For being one of the most politely vile adversaries I have ever read,
Ellsworth Toohey gets the Number 8 slot on my list.

Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula
I've reviewed Van Helsing elsewhere, and in that review I made a clear
point that Richard Roxburgh's version of Dracula made that movie. As a
nod to the old Universal and Hammer films, Van Helsing doesn't have
sympathetic vampires; these are damned souls, some of them cursed and
desiring release from the demonic drives that have taken them over,
others enjoying the freedom and power of their transformation.

None enjoy their undead state more than Dracula; he even mocks the
angsty, conflicted vampires of more modern times, with a monologue of
how terrible it is:

"I have no heart, I feel no love. Nor fear, nor joy, nor sorrow. I am
hollow... and I will live� forever."

Followed immediately with a cheerful, triumphant laugh, and

"I am at war with the world! And every living soul in it! But soon...
the final battle will begin."

Contrary to his little speech, it is clear that this version of Dracula
does feel most emotions, twisted though they might be. We see him happy,
angry, if not loving at least aware of the difference between having
people who are only afraid of him and people who worship him, and
certainly he shows fear when he realizes that Van Helsing has become the
one thing that might destroy him.

It is the casual, confident, and humorous air that he brings to the
monstrous which makes Roxburgh's Dracula so impressive. He is much more
powerful than many other depictions of the King of Vampires, but more
importantly he has a marvelously fluid ability to transition from urbane
monologues and amusing bon mots to scenery-chewing rants and back again,
often while pacing evenly along walls, floor, and ceiling.

This version of Dracula is also, to some extent, genre-savvy and aware
of the clich�s that he likes to fulfill, and those he finds less amusing:

*Velkan*: I would rather die than help you!

*Dracula*: Oh, don't be boring; everybody who says that dies.

Ultimately, it is his cheerful embrace of his own monstrous nature that
brings this version of Dracula to the Number 7 position on my list!

Number 6: Yardiff Bey
As I said earlier, an evil sorcerer is always a good choice for a
villain. Yardiff Bey is the main antagonist/villain in Brian Daley's
Coramonde dualogy. At first he seems a standard "evil Vizier" type,
having arranged to get the good king (the Ku-Mor-Mai) out of the way and
now runs the kingdom through the Queen and her son. But as the plot
progresses, it becomes clear that Bey is much more than this. He is a
master of manipulation, long-term thinking, and layer upon layer of
backup plans. It is not possible to defeat him with a single stroke; you
need to break multiple plans of his before he is even close to vulnerable.

He is also not at all averse to personal confrontation, and in addition
to a huge array of magical powers, Bey has many allies and specifically
designed sorcerous devices, up to and including a giant flying fortress
called "Cloud Ruler" which uses magicotech approaches � binding a fire
elemental inside a casing that allows its fire to be channeled as a set
of rocket/jet drives. He has also replaced one eye with the eye of some
unnamed but terribly powerful monster which, when uncovered, fires an
almost irresistable beam of power at whatever Bey is looking at;
unfortunately it also derives its power from the user's soul, so Bey
can't use it often.

What makes Bey stand out is how, even when faced by things beyond his
control or, sometimes, knowledge, he makes the correct deductions and at
least attempts to take the appropriate actions. When his well-ordered
plan to take over Coramonde and associated lands begins to fray at the
edges, he examines all elements and comes to the correct conclusion that
it is the outside factors � represented by the two natives of Earth, Van
Duyn and Gil MacDonald � which have caused all of the problems, and
MacDonald's military knowledge and presence which is the current issue.
He then moves to destroy MacDonald by a remote mechanism � no personal
confrontation, no warning, just "oh. That's the problem. Let's kill him
quickly."

When that goes sour, Bey goes and throws himself on the almost
nonexistent mercy of the demonlords he serves, and manages to talk his
way � calmly and rationally, despite his terror � out of punishment and
actually into a more powerful position than he was previously with them.
He then proceeds to engineer worse activities to bedevil, distract,
and/or destroy his adversaries.

Given what I like to read, one can be sure that Yardiff Bey is
eventually defeated, but he does indeed do more than well enough as a
villain to get him the Number 6 slot in my countdown of villainy!

Number 5: Mr. Bester
Walter Koenig was best known for his role as the fiercely Russian Pavel
Chekov on the original Star Trek series. Played with a
slightly-exaggerated accent and a definitely over-the-top Russian
nationalism, Chekov was otherwise the "boy wonder" of the show, being
played as younger, more innocent, and more na�ve than most of the other
crewmembers.

As Alfred Bester (named deliberately after the author of The Demolished
Man), P-12 agent of the Psi Corps, Koenig got to play a character that
was very nearly the polar opposite, and demonstrate that he could play
any role he wanted. Unlike many of my favorite villains, Bester rarely,
if ever, chewed the scenery; he was always quiet, polite, and often had
quite a sense of humor:

*Lauren Ashley*: We don't often see a sense of humor in Psi Cops.

*Alfred Bester*: Reports of our depression are vastly exaggerated.

He was also very much a villain; not merely a policeman working for a
corrupt regime (although he was certainly that), Bester is one of the
top people in the Corps and believes � wholeheartedly � that the
telepaths (which is their term for all psionics, really) are the next
stage of human evolution and that regular humans are outmoded and to be
pushed aside for the far superior species that follows.

Bester will use every tactic at his disposal to get what he wants � but
he is far, far too clever to be easily tricked into overstepping
himself. He is also very aware of how much he is disliked by most, and
meets hostility and threats with poison-candy smiles and the most polite
yet deadly ripostes.

At the same time, his loyalty to "my people" � the telepaths � is
complete and real. He will risk his life and make difficult bargains in
order to protect the telepaths of Psi Corps, or those he believes can be
brought to join him.

This combination � plus his powerful position with the Earth Government
and Psi Corps � allows him to generally manipulate things so that he is
just this side of being dispensable by the Babylon 5 crew. They may want
to throw him out the airlock, but he knows precisely the right buttons
to push in order to keep himself alive, even when Babylon 5 declares its
independence:

*Captain John Sheridan*: [Bester arrives in a Psi Corp Starfury] Mr.
Bester, we no longer have any ties to Earth or to the Psi Corps. So we
don't have to put up with *you* or your games. Now, I am sitting on four
brand new uni-directional pulse cannons. Give me one good reason why I
shouldn't blow you out of the sky.

*PsiCop Alfred Bester*: Because you're curious. Kill me and you'll never
know what brought me all the way out here. I think if you weigh that
against the brief satisfaction of blowing me out of the sky, you'll do
the right thing.

Bester's smiling, pleasant exterior hides someone usually as cold and
implacable as a steel blade, but he is, ultimately, very human � allying
himself with Babylon 5 for the sake of the woman he loves, and in the
end falling in love with a normal human woman.

But despite his humanity, he remained, mostly, a monster, and
especially for the hideous things he did to Michael Garibaldi, Bester
gets himself the Number 5 villain spot.

Number 4: Emperor Palpatine
Immediately recognizable to almost any fan, Emperor Palpatine is the
ultimate Big Bad of the Star Wars saga; he is, in fact, the trope image
for the trope "Big Bad".

Here we return to dramatic, scenery-chewing villany, and Ian McDiarmid
proves that he can chew it as well as anyone in this role-of-a-lifetime,
perhaps role of several lifetimes. Originally an older man was being
considered, but ultimately McDiarmid was selected to play the role in
old-man stage makeup � a decision which turned out extremely well, since
it allowed the same actor to reprise that role in the prequels as a
reasonably-aged "elder statesman", Senator Palpatine.

Ironically, McDiarmid's work as the ostensibly younger Palpatine,
slowly pulling strings both as Palpatine and "Darth Sidious" to make
himself ruler of the Galaxy, is one of the few truly worthwhile parts of
the prequel movies. Palpatine dominates his scenes, even when just being
the soft-spoken, apparently kindly Senator rather than the Sith Lord. He
shows his acting ability in stark contrast to most of the other actors
(whose roles appeared to be more constrained by direction), able to
switch between a genuine-seeming sympathy and support and a diabolically
cunning and malicious glee whenever the occasion demands.

Palpatine is a man who enjoys his work. He's rarely at a loss, and
rarely truly angered; it's clear that many of the times he appears
angry, disturbed, or confused are just more manipulation tactics. Driven
to extremes by his use of the Dark Side, the Emperor still maintains an
iron control of his every faculty, only making mistakes at the very end
of his career. Up until then, his most famous quote is literally true:

"All that has transpired here has done so according to my design!"

In his original appearances in Return of the Jedi, Palpatine also
brought us to the understanding of the potential power of the Dark Side,
in a way that Darth Vader, towering and threatening presence though he
was, could only hint at. He knew everything that was happening, and
possessed powers of the Force that we hadn't even realized were
possible. His only real mistake was in forgetting that Luke � unlike his
father � had not been raised around Palpatine, and thus hadn't been
"worked on" long enough to be completely confused and misdirected by the
Emperor.

And even with that mistake, it was a very, very near thing.

So a salute to one of the most recognizable of all villains, coming in
at Number 4!

Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne
Doc Smith's Lensman series is generally considered his magnum opus, but
it was in his (mostly) earlier Skylark series that he created his finest
villain � and, in some ways, perhaps his finest character: Marc C.
"Blackie" DuQuesne.

Designed as the opposite number for the hero Richard Seaton, DuQuesne
was physically identical in build but visually contrasting, with darker
skin and black hair and eyes which earned him his nickname. He and
Seaton were also equal in intellect.

But where Seaton was basically an all-American clean-cut young man who
happened to be a physics genius, DuQuesne was a scientist robber baron,
with the intent to take over the world and re-make it in his image of
what it should be � and he damn near did it, more than once. DuQuesne
was ruthless, brilliant, methodical, and dedicated, willing to endure
whatever was necessary in order to achieve his goals.

What kept him alive was that he was also a man of his word: once he
gave his word to do something, he would do it, and do it without
hesitation or stint. When circumstances forced him to ally with Seaton,
he would act fully as a member of Seaton's crew, and Seaton would act as
his, without a second thought.

While DuQuesne often appeared to be almost a villainous Vulcan � cold
emotionless analysis, a machine � he was not without emotion, and could
be surprised, frightened, or even engaging and affectionate under some
circumstances. He appreciated other people's ability, especially when it
didn't get in the way of his goals.

DuQuesne only really failed because he was, mostly, a one-man show. He
only could connect with people in specific ways, and truly felt he was
so superior to most other people that he had no patience for cultivating
their good will. This was, of course, his true mistake; Seaton stayed
ahead of him not because Seaton was smarter � both Seaton and DuQuesne
acknowledge that the other guy is at least as smart as they are � but
because Seaton made friends easily and honestly. He gained alliances
with multiple other species because he was straightforward and genuinely
interested in making the universe a better place. Because of this,
Seaton often got "freebies" � information or material handed to him by
people who he had allied himself with, that DuQuesne would either have
had to work out all by himself, or steal once he learned of its existence.

This is of course unsurprising; villains are like that, often, and if
you don't give the bad guy SOME kind of disadvantage your heroes may be
screwed.

What is somewhat surprising � and a moment of awesome � is the endgame
of the series. DuQuesne, Seaton, and Crane (Seaton's partner) are in the
middle of wiping out the implacable and utterly nasty Chlorans while
rescuing all the humanoid species in the same galaxy, in one of the most
titanically overpowered sequences in fictional history. But a few of the
Chlorans catch on and launch a counterattack that takes out Seaton and
Crane, leaving Marc C. DuQuesne in sole control of the most powerful
starship in the universe (perhaps the most powerful starship ever
conceived) and his two major adversaries dead or unconscious.

DuQuesne sticks with the program, finishes wiping out the Chlorans, and
keeps things going until Seaton and Crane are back on their feet. At
that point� he gives up his war against Seaton. He won't ally with him,
but he will leave the Galaxy and go far, far away to where he and Seaton
need never conflict again.

It was fascinating to watch his evolution as a character, and for his
coldly honorable brilliance I put him at Number 3 on my Villain List; he
also, of course, was honored by my creating a namesake for him in Grand
Central Arena.


Number 2: Davros
There's villains who want to take over cities. There's ones that want
to take over the world. There's others who want revenge for some (real
or imagined) slight against their people or reputation. There's others
that just like killing.

But then there's the Omnicidal Maniac. This guy doesn't want rulership.
He wants the ultimate expression of power: wiping out everything. Maybe
he just hates life. Maybe it's the only way to prove his genius. Maybe
he's in love with death itself. But for whatever reason, he really,
truly, means to KILL 'EM ALL, and that means you, your family, your
planet, everything.

And if you look under the dictionary for "Omnicidal Maniac", a picture
of Davros should be the first thing you see.

Davros is the megalomaniacally insane creator of Doctor Who's
longest-running and most popular adversaries, the Daleks. His existence
was something of a retcon, but for modern audiences not all that much of
one; Davros first appeared in the Fourth Doctor (Tom Baker) serial
Genesis of the Daleks, and became an instant hit (in a villanous way).

Like many of the great villains, Davros is capable of multiple moods
and expressions depending on his needs and situation. Unlike all the
others on this list, Davros himself is physically not merely fragile,
but nearly helpless; burned terribly by an accident (probably caused by
his own arrogance, but we never know for sure), Davros is confined to a
self-powered chair which serves as his life-support system, control
center, communications net, and defense. Davros is blind, though he
seems able to see through a cybernetic eye he has implanted in his
forehead, and has the use of only one arm � and that not terribly well.

It is not clear whether his accident had anything to do with unhinging
his mind, but unhinged or not, Davros remains brilliant beyond easy
description. The Doctor has faced many adversaries throughout his
career, but it is doubtful that any of them � with the possible
exception of the Doctor's opposite number, The Master � has ever given
him the same amount of trouble, or run him into so many corners.

Davros is not merely intelligent; he is also quite cunning, and has
many times used his apparent helplessness as a ploy or a lever to get
concessions. In addition, he can play the concerned, philanthropic
scientist to the hilt, with a gentle, almost musical voice of pure reason.

Using these tactics, he maneuvered both his own people, the Kaleds, and
their adversaries, the Thals, into a final pitched war that would end
with the extermination of both. While he was doing this, he created the
first of his most infamous inventions: the cybernetic organisms called
Daleks.

The constant radiation and poisoning of their world was slowly mutating
the Kaleds (and Thals), and Davros determined that the ultimate end of
this degeneration would be a hideous tentacled blob. He set about
creating a cybernetic shell which would shelter and empower the mutant
within. Believing that positive emotions such as love, remorse, pity,
and friendship were weaknesses, he also genetically engineered out any
predisposition to these emotions in the Daleks.

The Doctor was sent to try to stop this "genesis" of the Daleks, and in
one memorable moment tries to convince Davros that the Daleks must be
destroyed, that they are a destructive force too evil to be released:

*The Doctor*: Davros, if you had created a virus in your laboratory,
something contagious and infectious that killed on contact, a virus that
would destroy all other forms of life, would you allow its use?

*Davros*: It is an interesting conjecture.

*The Doctor*: Would you do it?

*Davros*: The only living thing, a microscopic organism reigning
supreme... A fascinating idea.

*The Doctor*: But would you do it?

*Davros*: Yes... Yes...

[raises hand as if holding the metaphorical capsule between thumb and
forefingers]

*Davros*: To hold in my hand a capsule that contains such power, to know
that life and death on such a scale was my choice... To know that the
tiny pressure of my thumb, enough to break the glass, would end
everything... Yes, I would do it! That power would set me up above the
gods! AND THROUGH THE DALEKS, I SHALL HAVE THAT POWER!

There we see the omnicidal maniac's own mind, laid bare by Davros'
words. And at that point, of course, Davros drops his quiet, reasonable
fa�ade and CHEWS THE SCENERY AS IS HIS DESTINY!

When overexcited or angered, Davros' voice rises in pitch and
insistence and gains an electronic overtone that echoes that of his
creations.

Ultimately, of course, Davros had an ironic death; the Daleks he had
created saw him as just another not-Dalek, and cared nothing for his
being their creator. He was exterminated by one of his own creations.

But death� ah, death is not the end for Davros. He returned, the Daleks
seeking him out and reviving him when they realized that they were
constantly being defeated. It is something of a cycle; the Daleks call
on Davros' help, but often try to imprison or betray him. As they cannot
conceive of any of the more positive emotions, the idea of gratitude or
even of simple forethought seems to elude them. Fortunately for Davros,
his tremendous intellect always provides him with the forethought and
preparation to survive even his own childrens' betrayal.

His greatest appearance following that debut was in the two-part New
Who story, The Stolen Earth/Journey's End, in which he demonstrated his
insanity and brilliance with some of the most inspired Large Ham ranting
the small screen has ever seen; trapping the Doctor, playing on the
Doctor's own doubts and fears in a manner showing that he is, indeed,
very capable of understanding people far better than most think:

*Davros*: The man who abhors violence, never carrying a gun, but this is
the truth, Doctor: you take ordinary people and you fashion them into
weapons... behold your Children of Time, transformed into murderers. I
made the Daleks, Doctor, you made this.

*The Doctor*: I'm trying to help.

*Davros*: Already I have seen them sacrificed today, for their beloved
Doctor. The Earth woman who fell opening the Sub Wave Network.

*The Doctor*: Who was that?

*Rose Tyler*: Harriet Jones. She gave her life to get you here.

[flashback of Harriet Jones]

*Davros*: How many more? Just think, how many have died in your name?

[more flashbacks of the people who have died helping The Doctor]

*Davros*: The Doctor, the man who keeps running, never looking back
because he dare not, out of shame. This is my final victory, Doctor. I
have shown you yourself.

But Davros doesn't need to rely on psychology; he has also created the
most over-the-top weapon in the history of television: the Reality Bomb,
a space-time weapon that will disintegrate all matter throughout the
multiverse, back to its component subatomic particles, and he � and the
Daleks � intend to use it, and then rebuild the universe in their image.

A salute to the maddest mad scientist in the Whoniverse, sitting here
at the penultimate position in my villain countdown!

_*Number 1: Orochimaru*_
The journey to the top has seen a lot of villains, and there are many
more excellent villains who aren't on this list. Picking the top dog in
this contest some years ago would have been very, very hard.

But not any more.

Orochimaru is the longest-running single adversary in the very
long-running anime and manga Naruto/Naruto Shippuden. Once, he was one
of the Three Legendary Sannin, top-skilled shinobi or ninjas (under
Naruto's definition of "ninja", which isn't the usual one) for the Leaf
Village who were the equal of nearly anyone else in the world; the other
two were Tsunade (who later became the Fifth Hokage, ruler of the Leaf)
and Jiraya (the Toad Sage, who became Naruto's teacher and remained one
of the most powerful warriors in the world until his death).

Orochimaru is often described as "twisted", possibly because of the
deaths of his parents at a very young age, but in his earlier days,
while a bit creepy in an Addamsesque way, he showed some sympathy and
empathy for other people, particularly Tsunade, whom he appeared to have
a personal affection for. He was even shown as crying when she lost the
person most dear to her.

But Orochimaru was always a bit� different, and it seemed that these
events, along with the pain of his past, triggered a change within him.
He began to seek out answers to the riddle of death itself; not merely
because he wanted to not die, nor because he wanted to stop the losses
he had been pained by, but because he had a far greater purpose: he
wished to become the greatest shinobi who had ever lived, mastering
every technique ("jutsu") in the entire shinobi world. That seemed a
task beyond even the most brilliant person to accomplish in a single
lifetime, and besides, if he died, what if someone else invented a new
technique afterward? He'd never have learned it.

_"I want to obtain all the techniques and gain a true understanding of
everything in this world. The first one to mix blue and yellow called
the new colour "green". I want to do something similar to that. If blue
is the chakra, then yellow is the seal, and green is the jutsu� Just as
there is no end to the variety of colours, there are so many thousands�
tens of thousands of techniques in the world as well. But in order to
obtain every possible technique and truth, it would require an eternity.
Only one who understands everything after spending such time on this can
be fittingly called the Ultimate Being."_

Wanting to fight back against death is not uncommon. Being a
high-functioning sociopath is also not terribly uncommon, at least in
fiction. In such fiction, it's also not terribly unusual for someone to
be a genius at whatever the key powers of the universe are. The
combination is terrifying. Orochimaru sought the answer to death and
life through experiments forbidden in any civilized world, while
learning an uncountable number of combat and medical techniques that
made him an ever-more-formidable adversary. When his experimentation was
discovered, he fled� and found a way to get his own village of willing
test subjects.

Orochimaru has everything a great villain should: a long-term vision,
physical power, genius, and a worldview that stands against anything
that good and just people believe in. He is possibly the smartest
villain I have ever seen in fiction. He makes David Xanatos (Gargoyles),
the Trope Namer for Xanatos Gambit, look like a complete amateur in
playing the chessmaster, while also being the equivalent in Naruto's
world of an expert in medicine, biology, chemistry, physics, military
weaponry, martial arts (both mundane and supernatural) espionage,
small-unit tactics and large scale strategy, as well as ancient lore.
And he uses this knowledge carefully and with forethought that goes
multiple layers deep.

That part is very important; by making backup plans for his backup
plans for his backup plans, Orochimaru is free to take his expertise
directly to the battlefield whenever it looks convenient or a
possibility for a swift advancing of his fortunes, because he has
already provided for any possibility of defeat. Even if you think you
kill him� you haven't; remember that his first and still ongoing goal is
complete and total immortality.

On top of all this, Orochimaru has style. Even when he's outmatched, he
can appreciate the skill and power of his opponent (the only exceptions
I can think of is when it appears he is really, truly going to die,
which makes sense given his purpose; whenever there's some reasonable
escape for him, defeat is just an amusement). He knows how to make a
dramatic entrance, how to unveil a new power to maximum shock-and-awe,
how to speak quietly with creepy menace and how to rant to the heavens.

Orochimaru has arrogance in his abilities, but he also can temper his
pride when needed; in the latest sequence, he has chosen to oppose the
Big Bads of the season because their plan would ruin his own, and having
done so, shows a DuQuesne-like tendency to fulfill that commitment in
spirit as well as letter. He's pulling out all the stops to assist �
healing those injured, fighting alongside his former teacher, rallying
others to the cause, and in short showing why he used to be one of the
greatest heroes of the Leaf.

There isn't a single characteristic of a great villain he lacks, and in
power, skill, and long-running menace he is utterly unmatched. In shonen
anime, where the villain of the season often becomes next season's
second string, and the third year's comic relief, it is very rare for a
villain who was the principal adversary in an early season to retain his
threat rating; by contrast, Orochimaru is still possibly the most
formidable character we have encountered, more than a decade into the
universe of Naruto.

For all of this, he has taken the top spot in my Villain Countdown!






--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

Interesting list.

Some of them I am not familiar with and so can't say you are wrong, but
I'm sure you know your... regard for "Speed Racer" is not widely shared.
I would move "The Joker" into that spot; he's got to be in there somewhere.

And I would move Darth Vader into the Palpatine spot. Really the Emperor
had very little to do in the classic films, mainly coming onscreen in Jedi
to provide a heavy while DV reformed..
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[JRStern]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:40:56 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

>Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton

>Number 9: Prince Koura
>Number 8: Ellsworth Toohey

>Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula

>Number 6: Yardiff Bey
>Number 5: Mr. Bester
>Number 4: Emperor Palpatine

>Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne

>Number 2: Davros
>_*Number 1: Orochimaru*_


What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos? Mr.
Mxyzptlk? Gharlane of Eddore? The Mule? Baron Harkonnen? Sauron?
Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?

This does raise a bit of an issue, there is kind of a shortage of
really well-formed villains. The enemy tends to be diffuse, The
System, The Conspiracy, Them, or else a not entirely believable
cartoon like The Joker.

On your list, I liked Marc DuQuesne the best - though it's been
decades since I read any Skylark books. I don't even know several
from your list.

J.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <4s332apfmhgip6f9e...@4ax.com>,

JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:40:56 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
><sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton
>>Number 9: Prince Koura
>>Number 8: Ellsworth Toohey
>>Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula
>>Number 6: Yardiff Bey
>>Number 5: Mr. Bester
>>Number 4: Emperor Palpatine
>>Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne
>>Number 2: Davros
>>_*Number 1: Orochimaru*_
>
>
>What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos? Mr.
>Mxyzptlk? Gharlane of Eddore? The Mule? Baron Harkonnen? Sauron?

Snidely is all about the magnificent voice acting. Check out Conreid
as con-man (con-fox) Professor Waldo Wigglesworth in Hoppity Hooper for
an even better start turn.

>
>This does raise a bit of an issue, there is kind of a shortage of
>really well-formed villains. The enemy tends to be diffuse, The
>System, The Conspiracy, Them, or else a not entirely believable
>cartoon like The Joker.
>

I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not hundreds
of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's really on. (I suspect
the same could be said of Davros).

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in
news:lvrm89$f6f$1...@dont-email.me:

> (NOTE: As with any such list, it's somewhat fluid; I might
> make it a
> little different if I were to write this list today, but I'm
> leaving this one as originally posted)
>
>
> While, at least in theory, we cheer for the victory of the
> heroes, it
> is often the villains that define a work, and certainly the
> villains tend to get the best lines, best music, and commonly
> the coolest "style" in a work.
>
> This probably partly stems from the fact that villains are
> more "free"
> than the heroes; they get to do what they want rather than what
> they should or must.

"I'm the bad guy, Jake. I can do whatever I want."
- Sid, in the movie Jake Speed
(He then licks the face of the Damsel In Distress' face to
demonstrate.)

> In addition, the villains tend to be in
> control, the ACTIVE force, in the story, at least up until the
> end; the heroes spend much of their time reacting rather than
> being directly active themselves.

Plus, the bad guys get the best lines.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:

>
> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).

The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
both are classic.

[JRStern]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:56:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
<taus...@gmail.com> wrote:

>t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
>news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
>> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>
>The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
>whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
>movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
>both are classic.

They each had moments, but I'm still not sure of the concept.
Actually Osama bin Laden was probably as close to a real life Joker as
one could hope for.

BTW I said "Lex Luthor" which still isn't bad, but I was visualizing
the green "Braniac" when I wrote it. Never really could see why the
comic had them both.

J.

[art...@yahoo.com]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:

>
> What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos? Mr.
>
> Mxyzptlk? Gharlane of Eddore? The Mule? Baron Harkonnen? Sauron?
>
> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?
>

Terl?
Hal?
The Father in Brain Child. (by George Turner).

[A.G.McDowell]

A terrific example of active villainy is Alan Rickman in "Robin Hood:
Prince of Thieves". It would be unfair to say that he stole the film, as
none of the other actors ever looked like they really wanted it -
perhaps they were too tired after running round to make sure it was
suitably inclusive and didn't offend anybody: several critics pointed
out that the film had obviously worked hard at that.

Would Orchimaru still remind me of Voldemort if I knew anything about
Orchimaru?

If the actions of the people in white hats become continually more and
more constrained, perhaps we will see more ambiguous types like Ariane
Emory of C.J.Cherry's Cyteen - she might be the hero, but if she existed
I'd be very careful to make sure she never even heard of me.

If the field is broadened to include races, I nominate the Kif from
C.J.Cherryh's Chanur series, and of course S.M.Sterling's Draka. (An
interesting comparison between alien viewpoints and sheer human
foulness. I could imagine having peaceful relations with the Kif, but
the Draka are definitely "Nuke 'em from orbit" material).

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

When they were created, they were very different characters. I still
like the early version of Luthor who is so focused on his schemes and
so unconcerned with normal life that he never bothers to change out of
his gray prison uniform. He was a sociopathic scientific genius, but
otherwise human.

The original Brainiac, on the other hand, was a super-intelligent alien
who collected inhabited cities for fun, and was pretty much beyond
human comprehension.

I still remember the shock when Brainiac was first revealed to be a
machine. I got that issue new off the stands as a kid, and that panel
where the top of his head comes off to reveal electronics was a serious
gosh-wow moment.





--
I'm no longer serializing an Ethshar novel!

[Lynn McGuire]

Dr. Impossible in _Soon I will be Invincible_ should
http://www.amazon.com/Soon-Invincible-Vintage-Austin-Grossman/dp/0307279863/
be around #2 or #3. You gotta feel for the guy.

Lynn

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-09-23, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> wrote:
> What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos?

Thanos is another Omnicidal Maniac, in his case because he's head over heels
in love with Death (the Marvel universe anthropomorphic personification, not
Gaiman's or Pratchett's), and has vast personal power and powers. Davros beats
him out on style points by quite a lot.

Lex Luthor ... maybe. His portrayal varies considerably, though, as with
EVERYONE'S in DC Comics over the years, and he's not always the scientific
super-genius (literally; Superman can figure out his inventions, but many of
them he wouldn't have thought to invent himself) who's been totally obsessed
with showing up Superman since a boyhood failed experiment from which he was
rescued by Superboy made his hair fall out. Sometimes he's an economic /
corporate villain. Sometimes things get strange. The variability, I'd think,
DQs him...

> Mr. Mxyzptlk?

He's not a _villain_ so much as a _bully_, sorry. One with inexplicable vast
magical powers, which paradoxically lessens his Great Villain Potential because
he doesn't have to WORK for anything he does, or have much of a character
behind it. (Like a lot of deities, in fact.)

> Gharlane of Eddore?

... Worthy. ... But I don't know who I'd pick in a fight of whatever kind
between him and Blackie DuQuesne. (Especially since if Gharlane is around, so
is the Mentor fusion, _somewhere_...)

> The Mule? Baron Harkonnen? Sauron?

No, no, and puhLEEZE, he was a second-rate imitation his _whole career_. If
you want to pick the villain from his setting, it HAS to be Morgoth/Melkor.

> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?

A quartet of "um no", though Dick Cheney's visible psychopathy does attract a
lot of people's "eww" reactions...

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"A.G.McDowell" <andrew-...@o2.co.uk> wrote in
news:lvseim$1ic$1...@dont-email.me:

Pretty much the only thing about that movie that didn't suck. Hard.

> It would be unfair to say that he
> stole the film, as none of the other actors ever looked like
> they really wanted it - perhaps they were too tired after
> running round to make sure it was suitably inclusive and didn't
> offend anybody: several critics pointed out that the film had
> obviously worked hard at that.

Calling it "stealing the film" is like saying that the garbage mane
stole your trash.

>
> Would Orchimaru still remind me of Voldemort if I knew anything
> about Orchimaru?

I'm sure that'd be a fascidnating question if I had ever heard of
Orchimaru.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?

Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote in
news:lvsfmv$94l$1...@dont-email.me:

> On 9/23/2014 6:40 AM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>> (NOTE: As with any such list, it's somewhat fluid; I might
>> make it a little different if I were to write this list
>> today, but I'm
>> leaving this one as originally posted)
>>
>>
>> While, at least in theory, we cheer for the victory of the
>> heroes, it is often the villains that define a work, and
>> certainly
>> the villains tend to get the best lines, best music, and
>> commonly the coolest "style" in a work.
>>
>> This probably partly stems from the fact that villains are
>> more "free" than the heroes; they get to do what they want
>> rather
>> than what they should or must. In addition, the villains tend
>> to be in control, the ACTIVE force, in the story, at least up
>> until the end; the heroes spend much of their time reacting
>> rather than being directly active themselves.
>>
>> Still, there are good villains, bad villains, and "meh"

>> villains� and a few, a very few, that stand out so much

>> from the others
>> that they say "This is what you should aspire to, if you seek
>> to be on the side of evil. Look, and see what a true VILLAIN
>> can be!"
>>
>> So I herewith present a list of my top ten villains from
>> various forms of fiction!
>>
>>
>> Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton
>> E. P. Arnold Royalton, almost always referred to simply as
>> "Mr. Royalton", is the head of Royalton Industries in the
>> movie
>> version of Speed Racer. Played with scenery-chewing relish by
>> Roger Allam, Royalton is a powerful and wealthy industrialist
>> who has no conscience nor pity for any below him. He believes

>> wholeheartedly in the dog-eat-dog world of corporate warfare �

>> not merely wholeheartedly, but passionately preaching the
>> gospel of the corporate game: "That's what racing is about. It
>> has nothing to do with cars or drivers. All that matters is
>> power, and the unassailable might of money!"
>>
>> One of only two "normal humans" on this list, Royalton
>> wouldn't be nearly so fun a villain if he weren't capable
>> of wearing a
>> convincing mask, and wear it he can. Even though we know he has
>> to be a bad guy, he seems to be the ideal of the corporate man

>> � one who climbed from nothing to the top, and yet remembers
>> what it's like to be at the bottom � perhaps a bit overeager to

>> impress, but then, many at the top are. The moment when
>> Royalton tears off that mask is actually quite horrifying; it
>> is a very Jekyll-and-Hyde moment, and Speed's utter shock
>> resonates with us.
>>
>> Royalton demonstrates the pitilessness and vicious nature

>> of evil � and, ultimately, its pettiness.

>> corporations � or individuals who normally are considered
>> powerful and capable.
>>
>> As the villain, Toohey eventually "gets his" � in what I

>> think of as one of the most understated Moments of Awesome
>> ever written

>> � but it is something of a Pyrrhic victory, because the cost to

>> shut him down is immense. It does not begin to make up for the
>> damage he has done, and it isn't clear that he will not be able
>> to start his venomous manipulations up again somewhere else.
>>
>> For being one of the most politely vile adversaries I have
>> ever read, Ellsworth Toohey gets the Number 8 slot on my
>> list.
>>
>> Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula
>> I've reviewed Van Helsing elsewhere, and in that review I
>> made a clear point that Richard Roxburgh's version of
>> Dracula made
>> that movie. As a nod to the old Universal and Hammer films, Van
>> Helsing doesn't have sympathetic vampires; these are damned
>> souls, some of them cursed and desiring release from the
>> demonic drives that have taken them over, others enjoying the
>> freedom and power of their transformation.
>>
>> None enjoy their undead state more than Dracula; he even
>> mocks the angsty, conflicted vampires of more modern
>> times, with a
>> monologue of how terrible it is:
>>
>> "I have no heart, I feel no love. Nor fear, nor joy, nor

>> sorrow. I am hollow... and I will live� forever."

>>
>> Followed immediately with a cheerful, triumphant laugh,
>> and
>>
>> "I am at war with the world! And every living soul in it! But
>> soon... the final battle will begin."
>>
>> Contrary to his little speech, it is clear that this
>> version of Dracula does feel most emotions, twisted though
>> they might be.
>> We see him happy, angry, if not loving at least aware of the
>> difference between having people who are only afraid of him and
>> people who worship him, and certainly he shows fear when he
>> realizes that Van Helsing has become the one thing that might
>> destroy him.
>>
>> It is the casual, confident, and humorous air that he
>> brings to the monstrous which makes Roxburgh's Dracula so
>> impressive. He
>> is much more powerful than many other depictions of the King of
>> Vampires, but more importantly he has a marvelously fluid
>> ability to transition from urbane monologues and amusing bon
>> mots to scenery-chewing rants and back again, often while
>> pacing evenly along walls, floor, and ceiling.
>>
>> This version of Dracula is also, to some extent,

>> genre-savvy and aware of the clich�s that he likes to

>> uses magicotech approaches � binding a fire elemental inside a

>> casing that allows its fire to be channeled as a set of
>> rocket/jet drives. He has also replaced one eye with the eye of
>> some unnamed but terribly powerful monster which, when
>> uncovered, fires an almost irresistable beam of power at
>> whatever Bey is looking at; unfortunately it also derives its
>> power from the user's soul, so Bey can't use it often.
>>
>> What makes Bey stand out is how, even when faced by things
>> beyond his control or, sometimes, knowledge, he makes the
>> correct
>> deductions and at least attempts to take the appropriate
>> actions. When his well-ordered plan to take over Coramonde and
>> associated lands begins to fray at the edges, he examines all
>> elements and comes to the correct conclusion that it is the

>> outside factors � represented by the two natives of Earth, Van
>> Duyn and Gil MacDonald � which have caused all of the problems,

>> and MacDonald's military knowledge and presence which is the
>> current issue. He then moves to destroy MacDonald by a remote

>> mechanism � no personal confrontation, no warning, just "oh.

>> That's the problem. Let's kill him quickly."
>>
>> When that goes sour, Bey goes and throws himself on the
>> almost nonexistent mercy of the demonlords he serves, and
>> manages to

>> talk his way � calmly and rationally, despite his terror � out

>> of punishment and actually into a more powerful position than
>> he was previously with them. He then proceeds to engineer worse
>> activities to bedevil, distract, and/or destroy his
>> adversaries.
>>
>> Given what I like to read, one can be sure that Yardiff
>> Bey is eventually defeated, but he does indeed do more
>> than well enough
>> as a villain to get him the Number 6 slot in my countdown of
>> villainy!
>>
>> Number 5: Mr. Bester
>> Walter Koenig was best known for his role as the fiercely
>> Russian Pavel Chekov on the original Star Trek series.
>> Played with a
>> slightly-exaggerated accent and a definitely over-the-top
>> Russian nationalism, Chekov was otherwise the "boy wonder" of
>> the show, being played as younger, more innocent, and more

>> na�ve than most of the other crewmembers.

>>
>> As Alfred Bester (named deliberately after the author of
>> The Demolished Man), P-12 agent of the Psi Corps, Koenig
>> got to play a
>> character that was very nearly the polar opposite, and
>> demonstrate that he could play any role he wanted. Unlike many
>> of my favorite villains, Bester rarely, if ever, chewed the
>> scenery; he was always quiet, polite, and often had quite a
>> sense of humor:
>>
>> *Lauren Ashley*: We don't often see a sense of humor in Psi
>> Cops.
>>
>> *Alfred Bester*: Reports of our depression are vastly
>> exaggerated.
>>
>> He was also very much a villain; not merely a policeman
>> working for a corrupt regime (although he was certainly
>> that), Bester is

>> one of the top people in the Corps and believes �
>> wholeheartedly � that the telepaths (which is their term for

>> all psionics, really) are the next stage of human evolution and
>> that regular humans are outmoded and to be pushed aside for the
>> far superior species that follows.
>>
>> Bester will use every tactic at his disposal to get what

>> he wants � but he is far, far too clever to be easily

>> tricked into
>> overstepping himself. He is also very aware of how much he is
>> disliked by most, and meets hostility and threats with
>> poison-candy smiles and the most polite yet deadly ripostes.
>>

>> At the same time, his loyalty to "my people" � the
>> telepaths � is complete and real. He will risk his life

>> and make difficult
>> bargains in order to protect the telepaths of Psi Corps, or
>> those he believes can be brought to join him.
>>

>> This combination � plus his powerful position with the
>> Earth Government and Psi Corps � allows him to generally

>> manipulate
>> things so that he is just this side of being dispensable by the
>> Babylon 5 crew. They may want to throw him out the airlock, but
>> he knows precisely the right buttons to push in order to keep
>> himself alive, even when Babylon 5 declares its independence:
>>
>> *Captain John Sheridan*: [Bester arrives in a Psi Corp
>> Starfury] Mr. Bester, we no longer have any ties to Earth or to
>> the Psi Corps. So we don't have to put up with *you* or your
>> games. Now, I am sitting on four brand new uni-directional
>> pulse cannons. Give me one good reason why I shouldn't blow you
>> out of the sky.
>>
>> *PsiCop Alfred Bester*: Because you're curious. Kill me and
>> you'll never know what brought me all the way out here. I think
>> if you weigh that against the brief satisfaction of blowing me
>> out of the sky, you'll do the right thing.
>>
>> Bester's smiling, pleasant exterior hides someone usually
>> as cold and implacable as a steel blade, but he is,
>> ultimately, very

>> human � allying himself with Babylon 5 for the sake of the

>> woman he loves, and in the end falling in love with a normal
>> human woman.
>>
>> But despite his humanity, he remained, mostly, a monster,
>> and especially for the hideous things he did to Michael
>> Garibaldi,
>> Bester gets himself the Number 5 villain spot.
>>
>> Number 4: Emperor Palpatine
>> Immediately recognizable to almost any fan, Emperor
>> Palpatine is the ultimate Big Bad of the Star Wars saga;
>> he is, in fact, the
>> trope image for the trope "Big Bad".
>>
>> Here we return to dramatic, scenery-chewing villany, and
>> Ian McDiarmid proves that he can chew it as well as anyone
>> in this
>> role-of-a-lifetime, perhaps role of several lifetimes.
>> Originally an older man was being considered, but ultimately
>> McDiarmid was selected to play the role in old-man stage makeup

>> � a decision which turned out extremely well, since it allowed

>> in forgetting that Luke � unlike his father � had not been

>> raised around Palpatine, and thus hadn't been "worked on" long
>> enough to be completely confused and misdirected by the
>> Emperor.
>>
>> And even with that mistake, it was a very, very near
>> thing.
>>
>> So a salute to one of the most recognizable of all
>> villains, coming in at Number 4!
>>
>> Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne
>> Doc Smith's Lensman series is generally considered his
>> magnum opus, but it was in his (mostly) earlier Skylark
>> series that he

>> created his finest villain � and, in some ways, perhaps his

>> finest character: Marc C. "Blackie" DuQuesne.
>>
>> Designed as the opposite number for the hero Richard
>> Seaton, DuQuesne was physically identical in build but
>> visually
>> contrasting, with darker skin and black hair and eyes which
>> earned him his nickname. He and Seaton were also equal in
>> intellect.
>>
>> But where Seaton was basically an all-American clean-cut
>> young man who happened to be a physics genius, DuQuesne
>> was a scientist
>> robber baron, with the intent to take over the world and

>> re-make it in his image of what it should be � and he damn near

>> did it, more than once. DuQuesne was ruthless, brilliant,
>> methodical, and dedicated, willing to endure whatever was
>> necessary in order to achieve his goals.
>>
>> What kept him alive was that he was also a man of his
>> word: once he gave his word to do something, he would do
>> it, and do it
>> without hesitation or stint. When circumstances forced him to
>> ally with Seaton, he would act fully as a member of Seaton's
>> crew, and Seaton would act as his, without a second thought.
>>
>> While DuQuesne often appeared to be almost a villainous

>> Vulcan � cold emotionless analysis, a machine � he was not

>> without
>> emotion, and could be surprised, frightened, or even engaging
>> and affectionate under some circumstances. He appreciated other
>> people's ability, especially when it didn't get in the way of
>> his goals.
>>
>> DuQuesne only really failed because he was, mostly, a
>> one-man show. He only could connect with people in
>> specific ways, and
>> truly felt he was so superior to most other people that he had
>> no patience for cultivating their good will. This was, of
>> course, his true mistake; Seaton stayed ahead of him not

>> because Seaton was smarter � both Seaton and DuQuesne

>> acknowledge that the other guy is at least as smart as they are

>> � but because Seaton made friends easily and honestly. He

>> gained alliances with multiple other species because he was
>> straightforward and genuinely interested in making the universe

>> a better place. Because of this, Seaton often got "freebies" �

>> information or material handed to him by people who he had
>> allied himself with, that DuQuesne would either have had to
>> work out all by himself, or steal once he learned of its
>> existence.
>>
>> This is of course unsurprising; villains are like that,
>> often, and if you don't give the bad guy SOME kind of
>> disadvantage your
>> heroes may be screwed.
>>

>> What is somewhat surprising � and a moment of awesome � is

>> the endgame of the series. DuQuesne, Seaton, and Crane
>> (Seaton's
>> partner) are in the middle of wiping out the implacable and
>> utterly nasty Chlorans while rescuing all the humanoid species
>> in the same galaxy, in one of the most titanically overpowered
>> sequences in fictional history. But a few of the Chlorans catch
>> on and launch a counterattack that takes out Seaton and Crane,
>> leaving Marc C. DuQuesne in sole control of the most powerful
>> starship in the universe (perhaps the most powerful starship
>> ever conceived) and his two major adversaries dead or
>> unconscious.
>>
>> DuQuesne sticks with the program, finishes wiping out the
>> Chlorans, and keeps things going until Seaton and Crane
>> are back on

>> their feet. At that point� he gives up his war against Seaton.

>> � and that not terribly well.

>>
>> It is not clear whether his accident had anything to do
>> with unhinging his mind, but unhinged or not, Davros
>> remains brilliant
>> beyond easy description. The Doctor has faced many adversaries

>> throughout his career, but it is doubtful that any of them �

>> with the possible exception of the Doctor's opposite number,

>> The Master � has ever given him the same amount of trouble, or

>> reasonable fa�ade and CHEWS THE SCENERY AS IS HIS DESTINY!

>>
>> When overexcited or angered, Davros' voice rises in pitch
>> and insistence and gains an electronic overtone that
>> echoes that of
>> his creations.
>>
>> Ultimately, of course, Davros had an ironic death; the
>> Daleks he had created saw him as just another not-Dalek,
>> and cared
>> nothing for his being their creator. He was exterminated by one
>> of his own creations.
>>

>> But death� ah, death is not the end for Davros. He

>> subatomic particles, and he � and the Daleks � intend to use

>> But Orochimaru was always a bit� different, and it seemed

>> that these events, along with the pain of his past,
>> triggered a change
>> within him. He began to seek out answers to the riddle of death
>> itself; not merely because he wanted to not die, nor because he
>> wanted to stop the losses he had been pained by, but because he
>> had a far greater purpose: he wished to become the greatest
>> shinobi who had ever lived, mastering every technique ("jutsu")
>> in the entire shinobi world. That seemed a task beyond even the
>> most brilliant person to accomplish in a single lifetime, and
>> besides, if he died, what if someone else invented a new
>> technique afterward? He'd never have learned it.
>>
>> _"I want to obtain all the techniques and gain a true
>> understanding of everything in this world. The first one to mix
>> blue and yellow called the new colour "green". I want to do
>> something similar to that. If blue is the chakra, then yellow

>> is the seal, and green is the jutsu� Just as there is no end to
>> the variety of colours, there are so many thousands� tens of

>> thousands of techniques in the world as well. But in order to
>> obtain every possible technique and truth, it would require an
>> eternity. Only one who understands everything after spending
>> such time on this can be fittingly called the Ultimate Being."_
>>
>> Wanting to fight back against death is not uncommon. Being
>> a high-functioning sociopath is also not terribly
>> uncommon, at least
>> in fiction. In such fiction, it's also not terribly unusual for
>> someone to be a genius at whatever the key powers of the
>> universe are. The combination is terrifying. Orochimaru sought
>> the answer to death and life through experiments forbidden in
>> any civilized world, while learning an uncountable number of
>> combat and medical techniques that made him an
>> ever-more-formidable adversary. When his experimentation was

>> discovered, he fled� and found a way to get his own village of

>> willing test subjects.
>>
>> Orochimaru has everything a great villain should: a
>> long-term vision, physical power, genius, and a worldview
>> that stands
>> against anything that good and just people believe in. He is
>> possibly the smartest villain I have ever seen in fiction. He
>> makes David Xanatos (Gargoyles), the Trope Namer for Xanatos
>> Gambit, look like a complete amateur in playing the
>> chessmaster, while also being the equivalent in Naruto's world
>> of an expert in medicine, biology, chemistry, physics, military
>> weaponry, martial arts (both mundane and supernatural)
>> espionage, small-unit tactics and large scale strategy, as well
>> as ancient lore. And he uses this knowledge carefully and with
>> forethought that goes multiple layers deep.
>>
>> That part is very important; by making backup plans for
>> his backup plans for his backup plans, Orochimaru is free
>> to take his
>> expertise directly to the battlefield whenever it looks
>> convenient or a possibility for a swift advancing of his
>> fortunes, because he has already provided for any possibility

>> of defeat. Even if you think you kill him� you haven't;

>> remember that his first and still ongoing goal is complete and
>> total immortality.
>>
>> On top of all this, Orochimaru has style. Even when he's
>> outmatched, he can appreciate the skill and power of his
>> opponent (the
>> only exceptions I can think of is when it appears he is really,
>> truly going to die, which makes sense given his purpose;
>> whenever there's some reasonable escape for him, defeat is just
>> an amusement). He knows how to make a dramatic entrance, how to
>> unveil a new power to maximum shock-and-awe, how to speak
>> quietly with creepy menace and how to rant to the heavens.
>>
>> Orochimaru has arrogance in his abilities, but he also can
>> temper his pride when needed; in the latest sequence, he
>> has chosen
>> to oppose the Big Bads of the season because their plan would
>> ruin his own, and having done so, shows a DuQuesne-like
>> tendency to fulfill that commitment in spirit as well as

>> letter. He's pulling out all the stops to assist � healing

>> those injured, fighting alongside his former teacher, rallying
>> others to the cause, and in short showing why he used to be one
>> of the greatest heroes of the Leaf.
>>
>> There isn't a single characteristic of a great villain he
>> lacks, and in power, skill, and long-running menace he is
>> utterly
>> unmatched. In shonen anime, where the villain of the season
>> often becomes next season's second string, and the third year's
>> comic relief, it is very rare for a villain who was the
>> principal adversary in an early season to retain his threat
>> rating; by contrast, Orochimaru is still possibly the most
>> formidable character we have encountered, more than a decade
>> into the universe of Naruto.
>>
>> For all of this, he has taken the top spot in my Villain
>> Countdown!
>
> Dr. Impossible in _Soon I will be Invincible_ should
> http://www.amazon.com/Soon-Invincible-Vintage-Austin-Grossman
> /dp/0307279863/
> be around #2 or #3. You gotta feel for the guy.
>
> Lynn
>
>
>
>

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:t96dnaiEAqXDVrzJ...@earthlink.com:

>> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?
>
> A quartet of "um no", though Dick Cheney's visible psychopathy
> does attract a lot of people's "eww" reactions...
>

Richelius is another one that depends a lot on which version. You can
get the man of his times who is desperately trying to protect his
beloved France, and is willing to do anything to do so (Heston's
Richlieu in the 1973 movies), or the greedy, grasping, amoral bastard
who protects France only because he takes good care of his belongings
(This year's The Musketeers, from the BBC), and have both be very,
very good.

[Scott Lurndal]

I'd have said Alan Rickman in _Die Hard_. Rapacious villany.

[Alie...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?

(snip 400+ lines)

At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and top-post as well.

So, nyahhh.

I suppose you earn a brevity point for only adding *two* lines...


Mark L. Fergerson

[Brian M. Scott]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:29:32 -0700 (PDT), "nu...@bid.nes"
<Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
<news:3d495857-d4c4-4506...@googlegroups.com>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless
> Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:

>> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
>> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?

> (snip 400+ lines)

> At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and
> top-post as well.

It doesn’t happen often, but in this case top-posting
actually made sense and was distinctly a courtesy, given
that he was going to mimic Lynn’s faux pas.

[...]

Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"nu...@bid.nes" <Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:3d495857-d4c4-4506...@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless
> Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
>> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?
>
> (snip 400+ lines)
>
> At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and top-post as
> well.

My my point, did I?

>
> So, nyahhh.
>
> I suppose you earn a brevity point for only adding *two*
> lines...
>

I'm an asshole. It says so on my character sheet.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in news:198y5cemv241q
$.7jmjpsze...@40tude.net:

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 13:29:32 -0700 (PDT), "nu...@bid.nes"
> <Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
> <news:3d495857-d4c4-4506...@googlegroups.com>
> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless
>> Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>
>>> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
>>> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?
>
>> (snip 400+ lines)
>
>> At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and
>> top-post as well.
>
> It doesn’t happen often, but in this case top-posting
> actually made sense and was distinctly a courtesy, given
> that he was going to mimic Lynn’s faux pas.
>

Oh, man, when *you*, of all people, get the point, the end of the
world must be nigh.

[David E. Siegel]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 4:02:00 PM UTC-4, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote in
>
> news:t96dnaiEAqXDVrzJ...@earthlink.com:
>
>
>
> >> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?
>
> > A quartet of "um no", though Dick Cheney's visible psychopathy
> > does attract a lot of people's "eww" reactions...
>
> Richelius is another one that depends a lot on which version. You can
> get the man of his times who is desperately trying to protect his
> beloved France, and is willing to do anything to do so (Heston's
> Richlieu in the 1973 movies), or the greedy, grasping, amoral bastard
> who protects France only because he takes good care of his belongings
> (This year's The Musketeers, from the BBC), and have both be very,
> very good.
>

Perhaps half-way between, the Richlieu in several of the 163x books by Flint and others. Committed to France, and to an ideal of Aristocracy, but at least
as much to his own power and importance, and perfectly willing to betray any ally and sponsor any crime towards those ends -- provided that he is *quite*
sure that it *will* work towards thsoe ends, very clever and capable of taking a long view.

Or the Richlieu of the original Dumas (or of his translators, i haven't read him in French) who is clearly willing to do whatever suits his political ends,
but the musketeers are never really sure what those ends actually are.

-DES

[David E. Siegel]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:

I found it interesting that only 2 of the above are from actual books, most are from movies, only 1 of which i have seen, I think.

I agree that of the above list DuQuesne is far and away the best, at least of those I know.

Sauron of Mordor is tempting, but while a truly immense foe, he does almost nothign directly and is largely off-stage in LotR. Melkor/Morgoth (Who
corrupted Sauron) is far more active, personally destroying the Two Trees, and stealing the Silmarils, to say nothing of his hand-to-hand fight with Finrod
Felagund.

And in any case Morgoth is a fallen Archangel (or near enough) the next best thing to a God of Evil. I think we want somewhat less overpowered characters
for true villainy.

Something of the same objection applies to Gharlane of Eddore, and besides, Gharlane doesn't seem to *do* very much, at least not on-stage. And he is
untouchable until Mentor wipes him out -- just not a really good villain, I think. His early (indirect) minion Helmuth who spoke for Boskone actually makes a better
villain, perhaps.

Hm, what about the Podmaster in _A Deepness in the Sky_? Some nice complex double-dealing, and a commitment to a misguided but long-term ideal. And if you are going in for group villains, the Emergency from which he comes is not a bad candidate, either.

If you want a truly selfish villain, how about William Walker from Stirling's _Island in the Sea of Time_ and sequels (although in the last book he does seem
to show a sincere interest in raising his children to be the proper next generation of his dynasty. But then, maybe that was just a retirement policy.


Still there does seem a shortage of high-quality literary villains out there, in spate of the existence of the Evil Overlord List.

-DES

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/23/14, 9:23 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> Interesting list.
>
> Some of them I am not familiar with and so can't say you are wrong, but
> I'm sure you know your... regard for "Speed Racer" is not widely shared.

Well, that's fine. Other people are free to be wrong, as I and the one
TIME reviewer of "Speed Racer" said.

> I would move "The Joker" into that spot; he's got to be in there somewhere.

I never liked the Joker; partly because his depiction has been SO over
the map that he doesn't have a CHARACTER to me unless I pick some very
specific era.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/23/14, 11:38 AM, JRStern wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:40:56 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
> <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton
>> Number 9: Prince Koura
>> Number 8: Ellsworth Toohey
>> Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula
>> Number 6: Yardiff Bey
>> Number 5: Mr. Bester
>> Number 4: Emperor Palpatine
>> Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne
>> Number 2: Davros
>> _*Number 1: Orochimaru*_
>
>
> What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov?

Real caricatures with no villainy.

> Lex Luthor?

Mainly because his focused idiocy over Superman drove me nuts.

> Thanos?

He and his opposite-brand Captain Ersatz Darkseid (actually, I think
it's the other way around -- Darkseid first) certainly both get to play
in the "Omnicidal Maniac" area, but they didn't quite grab me as much as
some of the others I listed.

> Mr. Mxyzptlk?

Not so much a villain as a PITA, except in "What Ever Happened to the
Man of Tomorrow".


> Gharlane of Eddore?

Poor Gharlane didn't get to do TOO much villainy himself as a
character. Helmuth got more screen time.


> The Mule?

I have a hard time putting the Mule firmly into the villain category.
Technically he is, but he's not an epic villain, more a tragic one.


> Baron Harkonnen?

Harkonnen, in the original Dune, was a pretty darn good villain. Dunno
if I'd replace any of mine with him, but he's a good choice.

> Sauron?

Never actually seen in the main source material; Sauruman's the only
baddie of note who gets screen time there.

> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu?

Real people need not apply.


> Auric Goldfinger?

Oooh, he certainly deserves consideration, if for nothing other than
"No, Mr. Bond; I expect you to die."

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/23/14, 11:56 AM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
> news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>
>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
>> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>
> The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
> whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
> movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
> both are classic.
>

Let's not forget Hamill and Caesar Romero.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

Oh, Rickman's great in just about everything, though my favorite
scene-stealing in that movie was by Friar Tuck taking care of business:
"Oh! I almost forgot! Here's thirty pieces of silver -- so you can pay
the DEVIL, ON YOUR WAY TO HELL!" (shoves corrupt cleric out the window)

> Would Orchimaru still remind me of Voldemort if I knew anything about
> Orchimaru?
>

Probably; I used Orochimaru as the template to make a SCARY version of
Voldemort in my Harry Potter campaign. Both are snake-themed. Both
sacrifice a lot of their humanity to make themselves immortal. Both
gather legions of fanatic people to their cause, and may dispose of them
at any convenient moment. But Orochimaru is *VASTLY* smarter, both
intellectually and emotionally, than Voldemort. Voldemort is a classic
sociopathic serial killer type, while Orochimaru is a magic-using
Hannibal Lecter, so to speak -- the serial killer with extra genre
savvy, psychological understanding, and long-term planning skills.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/23/14, 6:20 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:

>
> Hm, what about the Podmaster in _A Deepness in the Sky_?

Tomas Nau. Certainly an excellent candidate. I give some down-points to
him trying to avoid admitting he was a villain; most of mine KNOW
they're villains.

>
> If you want a truly selfish villain, how about William Walker from Stirling's _Island in the Sea of Time_

He did rather admit he was a villain by ordinary standards, and he was
pretty nasty.

[David E. Siegel]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 7:02:48 PM UTC-4, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> On 9/23/14, 6:20 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:
>
> > Hm, what about the Podmaster in _A Deepness in the Sky_?
>
> Tomas Nau. Certainly an excellent candidate. I give some down-points to
> him trying to avoid admitting he was a villain; most of mine KNOW
> they're villains.
>

Whereas I prefer a villain who is convinced that he is actually the hero. I find it more believable. Aside from out and out psychopaths, who thinks of himself (or herself) as Evil with a capital E. There is always a Cause, or a Reason, or maybe "I'm just gettin' mine while the gettin' is good, dude". The best villians are complex characters in their own rights, IMO. That is one of the good things about Blacky DuQuense -- for the Doc Smith world, he is a quite complex character.

-DES

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in
news:lvstml$iq9$2...@dont-email.me:

> On 9/23/14, 11:56 AM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
>> news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if
>>> not hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>>
>> The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad
>> guy) for whom it can be said there is more than one iconic
>> performance in a movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very*
>> different characters, but both are classic.
>>
>
>
> Let's not forget Hamill and Caesar Romero.
>

It's hard to imagine anything, anything at all, that campy as being
"epic." Sorry.

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/23/14, 7:16 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 7:02:48 PM UTC-4, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>> On 9/23/14, 6:20 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:
>>
>>> Hm, what about the Podmaster in _A Deepness in the Sky_?
>>
>> Tomas Nau. Certainly an excellent candidate. I give some down-points to
>> him trying to avoid admitting he was a villain; most of mine KNOW
>> they're villains.
>>
> Whereas I prefer a villain who is convinced that he is actually the hero. I find it more believable.

And commonplace, which is why they generally don't get on my list very
high. The ones who either admit they're villains, or charge forward as
villains with an indication of "even if I am the villain, doesn't
matter", they're the ones that stand out more. For the first type to get
high on the list, they need to be extraordinary in a number of ways that
Nau didn't quite achieve.

[Greg Goss]

"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

>> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu?
>
> Real people need not apply.

Which is more famous? Real Richelieu or literary guy? I know far
more of him through the 163x series than I ever knew from history.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Greg Goss]

>On 23/09/2014 16:52, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>> Plus, the bad guys get the best lines.

And the best cars. To the point where the current Jaguar motto is
"It's good to be bad."

[Kurt Busiek]

On 2014-09-23 18:14:36 +0000, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> said:

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:56:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy

> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
>> news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>>
>>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
>>> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>>
>> The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
>> whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
>> movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
>> both are classic.
>

> They each had moments, but I'm still not sure of the concept.
> Actually Osama bin Laden was probably as close to a real life Joker as
> one could hope for.

Bin Laden was a terrorist. He had a goal.

You want a real-life Joker, you want a lunatic thrill-killer, like Manson.

> BTW I said "Lex Luthor" which still isn't bad, but I was visualizing
> the green "Braniac" when I wrote it. Never really could see why the
> comic had them both.

While they were both smart (which was appropriate as counterparts to a
character who had such physical power), they had different foci --
Luthor was an inventor, Brainiac was an alien. Brainiac tended to bring
in alien artifact, Luthor built his own.

Plus, of course, Lex had human connections to Clark, being from
Smallville and all. So Luthor had ties on the human side, while
Brainiac represented his alien heritage; his personal connection to
Clark was through the Bottle City of Kandor.

kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!

[Robert Bannister]

On 24/09/2014 4:02 am, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:t96dnaiEAqXDVrzJ...@earthlink.com:
>
>>> Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric Goldfinger?
>>
>> A quartet of "um no", though Dick Cheney's visible psychopathy
>> does attract a lot of people's "eww" reactions...
>>
> Richelius is another one that depends a lot on which version. You can
> get the man of his times who is desperately trying to protect his
> beloved France, and is willing to do anything to do so (Heston's
> Richlieu in the 1973 movies), or the greedy, grasping, amoral bastard
> who protects France only because he takes good care of his belongings
> (This year's The Musketeers, from the BBC), and have both be very,
> very good.
>

Like another alleged villain, King John of England, Richelieu fixed
France's finances and brought in many other much needed reforms, but not
always out of altruism.

--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia

[Robert Bannister]

How much are we restricting this to SF - can we count Moriarty?

[Robert Bannister]

Some of the religious fantasy villains are quite scary. What's her name,
Salmissrya?, in the Belgariad was quite scary until she got sorted.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Tuesday, 23 September 2014 23:54:13 UTC+1, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> On 9/23/14, 11:56 AM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> > t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
> > news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
> >> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
> >> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
> >> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
> >
> > The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
> > whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
> > movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
> > both are classic.
>
> Let's not forget Hamill and Caesar Romero.

Right. Mind you, Cesar Romero's Joker generally didn't
have plots distinctively different from most of the other
TV Batman enemies: get a criminal hideout and henchmen,
steal something extremely valuable, practise your gimmick
throughout (jokes, clues, cats), and if Batman and Robin
show up, put them in a ridiculous deathtrap and then
let him escape. Villains out of the mainstream, like
"King Tut", had more interesting episodes. But
Romero's performance as Joker was fine, especially
the laugh.

As far as I remember, The Penguin had the very
interesting gimmick of getting treated as an
honest citizen being harassed by Batman. Defeating
him with legal sanctions.

I prefer my comics villains less homicidal than the
"modern" Joker - deathtraps for Batman notwithstanding:
I see that as a cry for help. He's apparently mentally
ill - and he kills arbitrarily and frequently. And so
you're only going to enjoy a Joker story if that
behaviour amuses you.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 10:32:32 +0800, Robert Bannister
<rob...@clubtelco.com> wrote in
<news:c8eoq3...@mid.individual.net> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> Some of the religious fantasy villains are quite scary.
> What's her name, Salmissrya?, in the Belgariad was quite
> scary until she got sorted.

Salmissra. Actually the name of every priest-queen of
Nyissa.

[David Johnston]

One of the problems with Moriarity is that he's largely a product of
fanon. Moriarity never appears onstage after all in any Sherlock Holmes
story.

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2014-09-23 21:56:35 -0400, Kurt Busiek said:

> On 2014-09-23 18:14:36 +0000, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> said:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:56:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
>> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
>>> news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>
>>>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
>>>> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>>>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>>>
>>> The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
>>> whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
>>> movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
>>> both are classic.
>>
>> They each had moments, but I'm still not sure of the concept.
>> Actually Osama bin Laden was probably as close to a real life Joker as
>> one could hope for.
>
> Bin Laden was a terrorist. He had a goal.
>
> You want a real-life Joker, you want a lunatic thrill-killer, like Manson.

Manson wasn't a thrill killer, exactly; he used murder to frighten his
enemies and ensure his followers' loyalty. It was power he wanted, not
fun.

>> BTW I said "Lex Luthor" which still isn't bad, but I was visualizing
>> the green "Braniac" when I wrote it. Never really could see why the
>> comic had them both.
>
> While they were both smart (which was appropriate as counterparts to a
> character who had such physical power), they had different foci --
> Luthor was an inventor, Brainiac was an alien. Brainiac tended to bring
> in alien artifact, Luthor built his own.
>
> Plus, of course, Lex had human connections to Clark, being from
> Smallville and all. So Luthor had ties on the human side, while
> Brainiac represented his alien heritage; his personal connection to
> Clark was through the Bottle City of Kandor.

--
I'm no longer serializing an Ethshar novel!

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <lvtiub$4tq$1...@dont-email.me>,

Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On 2014-09-23 21:56:35 -0400, Kurt Busiek said:
>
>> On 2014-09-23 18:14:36 +0000, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 08:56:00 -0700, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
>>> <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote in
>>>> news:c8dj27...@mid.individual.net:
>>>>>
>>>>> I listed the Joker. Since he has been written by dozens if not
>>>>> hundreds of writers he can be lame, but when he's on, he's
>>>>> really on. (I suspect the same could be said of Davros).
>>>>
>>>> The Joke is one of the very few characters (good guy or bad guy) for
>>>> whom it can be said there is more than one iconic performance in a
>>>> movie. Ledger and Nicholson played *very* different characters, but
>>>> both are classic.
>>>
>>> They each had moments, but I'm still not sure of the concept.
>>> Actually Osama bin Laden was probably as close to a real life Joker as
>>> one could hope for.
>>
>> Bin Laden was a terrorist. He had a goal.
>>
>> You want a real-life Joker, you want a lunatic thrill-killer, like Manson.
>
>Manson wasn't a thrill killer, exactly; he used murder to frighten his
>enemies and ensure his followers' loyalty. It was power he wanted, not
>fun.
>

And he wanted to be a songwriter. This

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmtM8PaZgag

Beach Boys' song is mostly Manson after he attached himself and his groupies
to Dennis Wilson (and later allegedly plotted to kill Wilson).
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

[David Goldfarb]

In article <lvstkr$iq9$1...@dont-email.me>,

Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> Thanos?
>
> He and his opposite-brand Captain Ersatz Darkseid (actually, I think
>it's the other way around -- Darkseid first)

Yes, Darkseid came first by several years.

And then of course Jim Starlin was working for DC and wanted to write
a Thanos story, so he filed the serial numbers off a bit differently
again and created Mongul.

--
David Goldfarb |"I'm sorry officer, but ever since I started
goldf...@gmail.com | wearing the Wonderbra I've been inexplicably
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | drawn around town preventing crimes."
| -- Bizarro

[David Goldfarb]

In article <lvsemn$2go$1...@dont-email.me>,
Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>The original Brainiac, on the other hand, was a super-intelligent alien
>who collected inhabited cities for fun, and was pretty much beyond
>human comprehension.

And who had a pet monkey.

--
David Goldfarb | Nunc, Pince, tibi nocendus sum.
goldf...@gmail.com |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | -- Aniinsani

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2014-09-24 02:21:04 -0400, David Goldfarb said:

> In article <lvsemn$2go$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>> The original Brainiac, on the other hand, was a super-intelligent alien
>> who collected inhabited cities for fun, and was pretty much beyond
>> human comprehension.
>
> And who had a pet monkey.

As I said, beyond human comprehension.

[James Nicoll]

In article <nCE6z...@kithrup.com>,

David Goldfarb <goldf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <lvsemn$2go$1...@dont-email.me>,
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>The original Brainiac, on the other hand, was a super-intelligent alien
>>who collected inhabited cities for fun, and was pretty much beyond
>>human comprehension.
>
>And who had a pet monkey.

One of the few times Andrew Wheeler shared one of my review rants
publicly involved my displeasure that a tie-in novel that used the Silver
Age Brainiac left out his space-monkey Koko.

"I protest the deprimatization of the DC Universe . if gorillas and
monkeys were good enough for Julius Schwartz, they should be good enough
for us!"

(Obviously DC kept the human primates: it was the loss of the non-human
primates I was complaining about).


--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <lvuipo$5n8$1...@reader1.panix.com>,

James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <nCE6z...@kithrup.com>,
>David Goldfarb <goldf...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>In article <lvsemn$2go$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>>>The original Brainiac, on the other hand, was a super-intelligent alien
>>>who collected inhabited cities for fun, and was pretty much beyond
>>>human comprehension.
>>
>>And who had a pet monkey.
>
>One of the few times Andrew Wheeler shared one of my review rants
>publicly involved my displeasure that a tie-in novel that used the Silver
>Age Brainiac left out his space-monkey Koko.
>
>"I protest the deprimatization of the DC Universe . if gorillas and
>monkeys were good enough for Julius Schwartz, they should be good enough
>for us!"
>
>(Obviously DC kept the human primates: it was the loss of the non-human
>primates I was complaining about).
>

I'm pretty sure Gorilla Grodd is still out there, and "Angel & The Ape"
had a Foglio series within living memory...

[Bill Dugan]

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:58:41 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
<sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

>On 9/23/14, 2:36 PM, A.G.McDowell wrote:

(snip)

>> Would Orchimaru still remind me of Voldemort if I knew anything about
>> Orchimaru?
>>
>
> Probably; I used Orochimaru as the template to make a SCARY version of
>Voldemort in my Harry Potter campaign. Both are snake-themed. Both
>sacrifice a lot of their humanity to make themselves immortal. Both
>gather legions of fanatic people to their cause, and may dispose of them
>at any convenient moment. But Orochimaru is *VASTLY* smarter, both
>intellectually and emotionally, than Voldemort. Voldemort is a classic

Voldemort certainly lacks emotional smarts but I'm not so sure about
intellectual. Although we don't see it much on-stage, he had to have
brains as well as talent to become one of the most powerful wizards of
his time.

[David E. Siegel]

> >> almost nothing directly and is largely off-stage in LotR.
>
> >> Melkor/Morgoth (who corrupted Sauron) is far more active, personally

> >> destroying the Two Trees, and stealing the Silmarils, to say nothing
> >> of his hand-to-hand fight with Finrod Felagund.
>
> > How much are we restricting this to SF - can we count Moriarty?
>
> One of the problems with Moriarity is that he's largely a product of
> fanon. Moriarity never appears onstage after all in any Sherlock Holmes
> story.

Yes, Moriarty *should* be a top-rated villain, but we never see him really *do* anything significant, and even the things we hear of his doing are left very vague. I am willing to count the final wrestling match with Holmes (recounted by Holmes in "The Empty House") as "onstage" since this is first-person narration from a participant in teh action, but that is about his only onstage time. Not good enough. The same objection could be made to Arnold Zeck (Nero Wolfe's Moriarty-figure) -- we never see him do anything, and get only sketchy reports of his nefarious actions.

Hmm, what about Rob Pierre, from the Honor Harrington books? He starts out as a would-be reformer, driven to seize power by a massivly corrupt system, and finds himself creating a far more actively corrupt system in it's place (sort of like Czar -> Stalin). He does get some onstage time, and directly orders lots of horrific acts.

That somehow reminds me of Admiral Vorrutyer from _Shards of Honor_ by Lois Bujold. He is running an aggressive, unprovoked war, plotting to seize the government (along with Prince Serg, who is after all the Heir to the Empire), and has Cordelia tortured and plans to do more along those lines.

Come to think of it, Bujold has several good villains. Baron Ryoval, of Mirror Dance is thoroughly nasty and sadistic, and comes close to "evil just for the fun of it" as Sea Wasp might prefer.

-DES

[Kevrob]

... as recently as 1999 the whole line went JLApe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JLApe:_Gorilla_Warfare!

Maybe my subconscious is doing a mashup, but at sometime, somebody (probably
Nelson Bridwell) must have had Koko face off with Beppo, or even Gleek.

Don't forget M. Mallah, the Doom patrol villain I believe Morrison used him.

Kevin R

[Kevrob]

> > >> least of those I know.

> > >> Sauron of Mordor is tempting, but while a truly immense foe, he does
> > >> almost nothing directly and is largely off-stage in LotR.

> > >> Melkor/Morgoth (who corrupted Sauron) is far more active, personally
> > >> destroying the Two Trees, and stealing the Silmarils, to say nothing
> > >> of his hand-to-hand fight with Finrod Felagund.

> > > How much are we restricting this to SF - can we count Moriarty?

> > One of the problems with Moriarity is that he's largely a product of
> > fanon. Moriarity never appears onstage after all in any Sherlock Holmes
> > story.

> Yes, Moriarty *should* be a top-rated villain, but we never see him really *do* anything significant, and even the things we hear of his doing are left very vague. I am willing to count the final wrestling match with Holmes (recounted by Holmes in "The Empty House") as "onstage" since this is first-person narration from a participant in teh action, but that is about his only onstage time. Not good enough. The same objection could be made to Arnold Zeck (Nero Wolfe's Moriarty-figure) -- we never see him do anything, and get only sketchy reports of his nefarious actions.

> Hmm, what about Rob Pierre, from the Honor Harrington books? He starts out as a would-be reformer, driven to seize power by a massivly corrupt system, and finds himself creating a far more actively corrupt system in it's place (sort of like Czar -> Stalin). He does get some onstage time, and directly orders lots of horrific acts.

> That somehow reminds me of Admiral Vorrutyer from _Shards of Honor_ by Lois Bujold. He is running an aggressive, unprovoked war, plotting to seize the government (along with Prince Serg, who is after all the Heir to the Empire), and has Cordelia tortured and plans to do more along those lines.

> Come to think of it, Bujold has several good villains. Baron Ryoval, of Mirror Dance is thoroughly nasty and sadistic, and comes close to "evil just for the fun of it" as Sea Wasp might prefer.

Gordon Dickson's Bleys Ahrens might be a cromulent villain.

Kevin R

[James Silverton]

Rob Pierre is a bit too close to his original: Robespierre of the French
Revolution. Carlyle called him "the sea-green incorruptible".


--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <0981688e-4856-481b...@googlegroups.com>,

And there's always Congorilla..

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"David E. Siegel" <sie...@acm.org> wrote in
news:498dd313-b451-4317...@googlegroups.com:

> That somehow reminds me of Admiral Vorrutyer from _Shards of
> Honor_ by Lois Bujold. He is running an aggressive, unprovoked
> war, plotting to seize the government (along with Prince Serg,
> who is after all the Heir to the Empire), and has Cordelia
> tortured and plans to do more along those lines.
>
> Come to think of it, Bujold has several good villains. Baron
> Ryoval, of Mirror Dance is thoroughly nasty and sadistic, and
> comes close to "evil just for the fun of it" as Sea Wasp might
> prefer.
>

Bujold has a gift for distinguishing between "us and them," "good and
evil," and "good guys and bad guys." With frequent examples of all in
the same book. Vorrutyer is obviously a bad buy, but the most evil
person in the whole series is Ezar, who is a good guy. And Bothari is
described as a the most heroic monster Cordelia has ever seen.

[Don Kuenz]

Iago in _Othello_ is a great, non-SF villain.

Here's yet another list (mostly off the top of my head).

House Harkonnen in _Dune_
Belizuek in _Interstellar Empire_
Dr Stark in _Coma_
Sonny Hokori in _TekLords_
Napoleon in _Animal Farm_
Mr Madison in _Probability Broach_
Hannegan II in _A Canticle for Leibowitz_
Cando Proska in _Wheels Within Wheels_
Dagobert in _Foundation and Empire_
U-1 in _Agent of Vega_

--
Don Kuenz

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:19:48 -0700 (PDT), "David E. Siegel"

<sie...@acm.org> wrote in
<news:498dd313-b451-4317...@googlegroups.com>

in rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> Hmm, what about Rob Pierre, from the Honor Harrington
> books? He starts out as a would-be reformer, driven to
> seize power by a massivly corrupt system, and finds
> himself creating a far more actively corrupt system in
> it's place (sort of like Czar -> Stalin). He does get
> some onstage time, and directly orders lots of horrific
> acts.

I have some sympathy for him: he tried to ride a tiger, and
it ate him. I even have some sympathy for Oscar Saint-Just;
he’s amoral and capable of horrors, but he’s not evil. Of
the original triumvirate, it’s Cordelia Ransom who comes
across as truly villainous.

[...]

[Greg Goss]

Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:

>> <list of villains>

>> Hmm, what about Rob Pierre, from the Honor Harrington books? He starts out as a would-be reformer, driven to seize power by a massivly corrupt system, and finds himself creating a far more actively corrupt system in it's place (sort of like Czar -> Stalin). He does get some onstage time, and directly orders lots of horrific acts.

Well, he intended reform, and without him the system was heading into
collapse. But he implemented reform with mass murder right up front,
even before putting his new system in place.

But he (privately to himself) expresses angst over the evil he does.
Somehow this undermines his status as "villain" to me. So I see the
cold emotionless "accountant-style" murderer Saint-Just or the
consumed-by-hatred Ransom as more villain than him. I think most of
the horrific acts were routed through Saint-Just, but since SJ was
slavishly devoted to RSP, I guess that doesn't let him off.

[Greg Goss]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:

>On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 08:19:48 -0700 (PDT), "David E. Siegel"
><sie...@acm.org> wrote in
><news:498dd313-b451-4317...@googlegroups.com>
>in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>[...]
>
>> Hmm, what about Rob Pierre, from the Honor Harrington
>> books? He starts out as a would-be reformer, driven to
>> seize power by a massivly corrupt system, and finds
>> himself creating a far more actively corrupt system in
>> it's place (sort of like Czar -> Stalin). He does get
>> some onstage time, and directly orders lots of horrific
>> acts.
>
>I have some sympathy for him: he tried to ride a tiger, and
>it ate him. I even have some sympathy for Oscar Saint-Just;
>he�s amoral and capable of horrors, but he�s not evil. Of
>the original triumvirate, it�s Cordelia Ransom who comes
>across as truly villainous.

I said much the same thing, except that I am willing to include
"amoral soul-of-an-accountant mass murderer" as just as evil as
"consumed by hatred".

[JRStern]

Emmanuel Goldstein was a great semi-SF villain.

The Vom in "Bloodhype" was a good villain/monster.

John Ominor and Orcus were good villains in Saberhagen's "Empire of
the East", and so was Som the Dead.

... but it starts getting kind of obscure at this point and none of
them were *that* great villains, I'm still trying to come up with even
an obscure one really strong enough to mention.

Galactus in the Marvelverse was a good and somewhat ambivalent villain
until they complicated his story beyond all comprehension or maybe it
was because they complicated his story beyond all comprehension.

J.

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <8u362ap6jddl96ban...@4ax.com>,

Nah, (classic) Galactus is really not a villain any more than Hurricane
Hugo was a villain. He's a force of nature.

[Don Kuenz]

Don't get hung up on strong villains. It's fun to just do ten villains
off the top of your head. Especially the ephemeral ones such as Dagobert.

To Bayta, consciousness returned sluggishly, but without the
"Where am I?" sensation. She remembered clearly the odd old
man who called himself emperor, and the other men who waited
outside. The arthritic tingle in her finger joints meant a
stun pistol.

She kept her eyes closed, and listened with painful attention
to the voices.

There were two of them. One was slow and cautious, with a
slyness beneath the surface obsequity. The other was hoarse
and thick, almost sodden, and blurted out in viscous spurts.
Bayta liked neither.

The thick voice was predominant.

Bayta caught the last words, "He will live forever, that old
madman. It wearies me. It annoys me. Commason, I will have it.
I grow older, too."

"Your highness, let us first see of what use these people are.
It may be we shall have sources of strength other than your
father still provides."

The thick voice was lost in a bubbling whisper. Bayta caught
only the phrase, " -the girl-" but the other, fawning voice
was a nasty, low, running chuckle followed by a comradely,
near-patronizing, "Dagobert, you do not age. They lie who
say you are not a youth of twenty."

They laughed together, and Bayta's blood was an icy trickle.
Dagobert - your highness - The old emperor had spoken of a
headstrong son, and the implication of the whispers now beat
dully upon her. But such things didn't happen to people in
real life-

Toran's voice broke upon her in a slow, hard current of
cursing.

She opened her eyes, and Toran's, which were upon her, showed
open relief. He said, fiercely, "This banditry will be answered
by the emperor. Release us."

It dawned upon Bayta that her wrists and ankles were fastened
to wall and floor by a tight attraction field.

Thick Voice approached Toran. He was paunchy, his lower eyelids
puffed darkly, and his hair was thinning out. There was a gay
feather in his peaked hat, and the edging of his doublet was
embroidered with silvery metal-foam.

He sneered with a heavy amusement. "The emperor? The poor, mad
emperor?"

"I have his pass. No subject may hinder our freedom."

"But I am no subject, space-garbage. I am the regent and crown
prince and am to be addressed as such. As for my poor silly
father, it amuses him to see visitors occasionally. And we
humor him. It tickles his mock-imperial fancy. But, of course,
it has no other meaning."

And then he was before Bayta, and she looked up at him
contemptuously. He leaned close and his breath was overpoweringly
minted.

He said, "Her eyes suit well, Commason - she is even prettier
with them open. I think she'll do. It will be an exotic dish
for a jaded taste, eh?"

--
Don Kuenz

[Kevrob]

The original Lee/Kirby stories were very cool, and were very much in the
ancient tradition that _the godz don't care_ , but I always felt that
"Big G is above good and evil" rap was bogus. I'm an omnivore, but if
all or part of what was destined to be my lunch started to plead for its
life in ways I could understand, I'd reconsider my feeding habits.

In Kirby's ETERNALS, communicating with the Celestials just wasn't on.
I don't know if Jack originally planned Galactus to be a non-speaking
alien, perhaps only communicating through his herald, the Surfer, with
Stan adding dialogue, `cause, c'mon, Stan, letting the picture tell the
story?

Other great pop-culture villains:

Ivan Shark (Captain Midnight's foe.)

John Sunlight (only bad'un to face Doc Savage twice)

Shiwan Khan (faced off thrice against The Shadow)

The Phantom Blot

Solomon Grundy

The Beagle Boys

R'as al Ghul (for those who find the Joker too chaotic)

Kevin R

[Alie...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 1:54:43 PM UTC-7, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> "nu...@bid.nes" <Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
>
> news:3d495857-d4c4-4506...@googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless
>
> > Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>
> >> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
> >> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?
>
> > (snip 400+ lines)
>
> > At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and top-post as
> > well.
>
> My my point, did I?

You did *not* just misspell "Made", did you?

> > So, nyahhh.
>
> > I suppose you earn a brevity point for only adding *two*
> > lines...
>
> I'm an asshole. It says so on my character sheet.

Your sig file says "asshole" is just a component:

> "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."

Is that like "more dakka"?

Now that I think about it, it also sorta describes a "thinks he's the Good Guy" villain...

Just sayin'.


Mark L. Fergerson

[Kevrob]

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 4:23:27 PM UTC-4, Kevrob wrote:

> Shiwan Khan (faced off thrice against The Shadow)

CORRECTION: 4X

Kevin R

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"nu...@bid.nes" <Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:7f78b89d-cac1-417e...@googlegroups.com:

> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 1:54:43 PM UTC-7, Gutless
> Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>> "nu...@bid.nes" <Alie...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>
>> news:3d495857-d4c4-4506...@googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 12:59:04 PM UTC-7, Gutless
>>
>> > Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>>
>> >> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three
>> >> of your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?
>>
>> > (snip 400+ lines)
>>
>> > At least as necessary as it was for you to do, and top-post
>> > as well.
>>
>> My my point, did I?
>
> You did *not* just misspell "Made", did you?

I didn't *just* misspell it, not. That was yesterday.

>
>> > So, nyahhh.
>>
>> > I suppose you earn a brevity point for only adding *two*
>> > lines...
>>
>> I'm an asshole. It says so on my character sheet.
>
> Your sig file says "asshole" is just a component:

I didn't claim I was *pure* asshole. Believe it or not, it's
possible to have more than on characteristic at a time. Unlike most
fictional characters.

>
>> "Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
>
> Is that like "more dakka"?
>
> Now that I think about it, it also sorta describes a "thinks
> he's the Good Guy" villain...
>
> Just sayin'.
>

I always did like books where the bad guys are more "them" than
"evil." Perhaps you've uncovered why.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."

[Moriarty]

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 12:24:31 PM UTC+10, Robert Bannister wrote:

<snip>

> How much are we restricting this to SF - can we count Moriarty?

No, Grytpype-Thynne was the real villian of that show, Moriarty was the sidekick.

-Moriarty

[Moriarty]

On Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:15:54 AM UTC+10, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:

<snip>

> Bujold has a gift for distinguishing between "us and them," "good and
> evil," and "good guys and bad guys." With frequent examples of all in
> the same book. Vorrutyer is obviously a bad buy, but the most evil
> person in the whole series is Ezar, who is a good guy. And Bothari is
> described as a the most heroic monster Cordelia has ever seen.

It's been a while, but I don't recall anything ambiguous about Baron Ryoval. He was an out-and-out mustache twirler with no redeeming features.

One of the creepiest villians I read growing up was Archbishop Loris from the original Deryni trilogy. Everything he did made perfect sense from his POV, which was that God wanted an Inquisition carried out by His church.

-Moriarty

[Moriarty]

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 6:22:38 AM UTC+10, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> "A.G.McDowell" <andrew-...@o2.co.uk> writes:

<snip>

> >A terrific example of active villainy is Alan Rickman in "Robin Hood:
>
> >Prince of Thieves".
>
>
>
> I'd have said Alan Rickman in _Die Hard_. Rapacious villany.

In a similar vein, Tom Hiddleston's Loki in _The Avengers_. Hiddleston compared Loki to Hans Gruber in an email to Joss Whedon:

"Thank you for writing me my Hans Gruber. But a Hans Gruber with super-magic powers. As played by James Mason ... It's high operatic villainy alongside detached throwaway tongue-in-cheek; plus the "real menace" and his closely guarded suitcase of pain. It's grand and epic and majestic and poetic and lyrical and wicked and rich and badass and might possibly be the most gloriously fun part I've ever stared down the barrel of playing. It is just so juicy."

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/tom-hiddlestons-avengers-email-to-joss-whedon-2014-7

-Moriarty

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <2ec202e6-b847-4b1b...@googlegroups.com>,

The Horton argument..

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <e453a2f6-af76-492e...@googlegroups.com>,

Tell it to The Hulk..

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 9/24/14, 10:36 AM, Bill Dugan wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:58:41 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
> <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>> On 9/23/14, 2:36 PM, A.G.McDowell wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>>> Would Orchimaru still remind me of Voldemort if I knew anything about
>>> Orchimaru?
>>>
>>
>> Probably; I used Orochimaru as the template to make a SCARY version of
>> Voldemort in my Harry Potter campaign. Both are snake-themed. Both
>> sacrifice a lot of their humanity to make themselves immortal. Both
>> gather legions of fanatic people to their cause, and may dispose of them
>> at any convenient moment. But Orochimaru is *VASTLY* smarter, both
>> intellectually and emotionally, than Voldemort. Voldemort is a classic
>
> Voldemort certainly lacks emotional smarts but I'm not so sure about
> intellectual. Although we don't see it much on-stage, he had to have
> brains as well as talent to become one of the most powerful wizards of
> his time.
>

This is what TVTropes calls "Informed Ability" -- we're told how
brilliant Voldy is, but he never does anything very bright onstage.

Honestly, though, most wizards appear thicker than bricks, so possibly
"As smart as your average bear" is the supergenius equivalent for most
wizards.

As I was running an RPG campaign, I had to adjust the world to fit the
fact that not only was I dealing with intelligent players, but they were
playing characters who would be disrupting the plotline, so everyone --
most especially the villains -- had to get a lot smarter. (Characters
included Hermione, Wednesday Addams, Hadji Quest, and Jade Chan)


An interesting side note is that "Orochimaru" in Naruto is part of a
triumvirate of legendary ninja with the other two being Jiraya and
Tsunade; this is actually adapted from a real Japanese legend, including
the theme-associations of each character with snakes, toads, and slugs,
respectively.

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[Robert Carnegie]

...oh, I see. "Hans Gruber" is a not entirely uncommon
name. And to add to puzzlement, the character I was
thinking of is actually called Hubert Gruber - the
very much accepted gay Nazi lieutenant in _'Allo 'Allo!_
Great villain - well, no.

[Kurt Busiek]

On 2014-09-24 06:20:20 +0000, gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) said:

> In article <lvstkr$iq9$1...@dont-email.me>,

> Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

>>> Thanos?
>>
>> He and his opposite-brand Captain Ersatz Darkseid (actually, I think
>> it's the other way around -- Darkseid first)
>
> Yes, Darkseid came first by several years.
>
> And then of course Jim Starlin was working for DC and wanted to write
> a Thanos story, so he filed the serial numbers off a bit differently
> again and created Mongul.

More that we wanted to draw Thanos again, or something similar, since
Mongul was co-created by Len Wein and Starlin in a story Len wrote and
Starlin drew.

Starlin's only written Mongul twice, actually -- he co-plotted a story
with Paul Levitz in 1981, and then didn't write the character again
until last year.

Aside from visually, Mongul and Thanos are not all that similar --
Mongul is an intergalactic Genghis Khan, ruler of a nomadic planet of
warriors. Thanos is a death-obsessed sorta-god. When Len cooked up that
first story, what he wanted was someone who could physically challenge
Superman, and that's pretty much how he's been used.

Interestingly, Starlin's first take on Thanos wasn't much like
Darkseid, either -- he was far more like Metron, another Kirby New Gods
character. But Starlin's editor (Roy Thomas?) told Starlin to beef him
up and make him more physically prepossessing, and that led to the more
Darkseid-looking version.

kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Moriarty <blu...@ivillage.com> wrote in
news:fb8e3213-7616-4379...@googlegroups.com:

> On Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:15:54 AM UTC+10, Gutless
> Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Bujold has a gift for distinguishing between "us and them,"
>> "good and evil," and "good guys and bad guys." With frequent
>> examples of all in the same book. Vorrutyer is obviously a bad
>> buy, but the most evil person in the whole series is Ezar, who
>> is a good guy. And Bothari is described as a the most heroic
>> monster Cordelia has ever seen.
>
> It's been a while, but I don't recall anything ambiguous about
> Baron Ryoval. He was an out-and-out mustache twirler with no
> redeeming features.

That was one of the less ambiguous books, yeah.

>
> One of the creepiest villians I read growing up was Archbishop
> Loris from the original Deryni trilogy. Everything he did made
> perfect sense from his POV, which was that God wanted an
> Inquisition carried out by His church.
>

Very good example, yeah. Nothing ambiguous about who is the good guy
and who is the bad bad guy, but all the major characters had depth.

[David E. Siegel]

On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 5:53:16 PM UTC-4, Moriarty wrote:
> On Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:15:54 AM UTC+10, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> > Bujold has a gift for distinguishing between "us and them," "good and
> > evil," and "good guys and bad guys." With frequent examples of all in
> > the same book. Vorrutyer is obviously a bad buy, but the most evil
> > person in the whole series is Ezar, who is a good guy. And Bothari is
> > described as a the most heroic monster Cordelia has ever seen.
>
> It's been a while, but I don't recall anything ambiguous about Baron Ryoval. He was an out-and-out mustache twirler with no redeeming features.
>

The phrase was "both in the same book" not "both in the same person" Ezar was ambiguous. Bothari was ambiguous. Royval was not. Metzov started ambiguous, but
was crazy and totally evil by the end. For the matter of that, Miles has done some very nasty things himself over the years

>
> One of the creepiest villians I read growing up was Archbishop Loris from the original Deryni trilogy. Everything he did made perfect sense from his POV, which was that God wanted an Inquisition carried out by His church.
>

He shows up again, even nastier, and given more onstage time, in _The Bishop's Heir_ and especially _The King's Justice_.

-DES

[Kurt Busiek]

"Moriarty, where are you?"

"Over here, in the piano!"

"What the devil are you doing in the piano?"

"I'm hidin'!"

"Don't be silly, Haydn's been dead for years."

[pause]

"Moriarty, I can't see you..."

"I'm disguised as one of the strings!"

"Mm. Which string are you?"

"I think I'm a G-string!"

"Ah, no wonder I can't see you."

[JRStern]

The fiend!

J.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Wednesday, 24 September 2014 23:28:20 UTC+1, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
> On 9/24/14, 10:36 AM, Bill Dugan wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 18:58:41 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
> > <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> >> Probably; I used Orochimaru as the template to make a SCARY version of
> >> Voldemort in my Harry Potter campaign. Both are snake-themed. Both
> >> sacrifice a lot of their humanity to make themselves immortal. Both
> >> gather legions of fanatic people to their cause, and may dispose of them
> >> at any convenient moment. But Orochimaru is *VASTLY* smarter, both
> >> intellectually and emotionally, than Voldemort. Voldemort is a classic
> >
> > Voldemort certainly lacks emotional smarts but I'm not so sure about
> > intellectual. Although we don't see it much on-stage, he had to have
> > brains as well as talent to become one of the most powerful wizards of
> > his time.
>
> This is what TVTropes calls "Informed Ability" -- we're told how
> brilliant Voldy is, but he never does anything very bright onstage.
>
> Honestly, though, most wizards appear thicker than bricks, so possibly
> "As smart as your average bear" is the supergenius equivalent for most
> wizards.

I don't know if we've argued this before, but Voldemort
uses a different kind of "emotional intelligence" to try
to get to the famous but secret prophecy, and Harry Potter
falls for it hard. Well... maybe tricking a teenage boy
isn't /that/ hard. Voldie doesn't /like/ love and he
doesn't necessarily recognise it, but he can exploit it.

Voldie also has a whole cabinet of crafty and dark-hued
wizards in his gang - apparently they emphasise that kind
of thing in Slytherin House. So to stay in control of
them and not be overthrown, he's doing quite well.

Of course he's immortal (or, from another point of view,
already dead) and has a great big snake called Nagini,
so the details may take care of themselves.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 10:15:54 -0700, Gutless Umbrella
Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote in
<news:XnsA3B2686C357...@69.16.179.42> in
rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> And Bothari is described as a the most heroic monster
> Cordelia has ever seen.

Bothari is far more damaged, but he still reminds me a bit
of Tovara, Adele Mundy’s bodyguard in Drake’s RCN series,
with whom I’m more familiar. Donal Graeme’s personal
orderly Lee in _Dorsai!_ also has much in common with
Tovara.

[A. Tina Hall]

Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:

> (NOTE: As with any such list, it's somewhat fluid; I might make it
> a little different if I were to write this list today, but I'm
> leaving this one as originally posted)

It's also huge, so I don't think I'll spend the hours needed to read all
of it. But I've seen something in a reply that I'd like to comment on.

> While, at least in theory, we cheer for the victory of the heroes,
> it is often the villains that define a work, and certainly the
> villains tend to get the best lines, best music, and commonly the
> coolest "style" in a work.

I ended up cheering the bad guys in books with no characters that I
would call decent in sight. (Right before I stopped buying them.)

But in most cases I find them rather lame, one reason I made up my own
Evil Overlord(s).

> This probably partly stems from the fact that villains are more
> "free" than the heroes; they get to do what they want rather than
> what they should or must. In addition, the villains tend to be in
> control, the ACTIVE force, in the story, at least up until the end;
> the heroes spend much of their time reacting rather than being
> directly active themselves.

I can't actually think about an example, except maybe Doctor Who. But
the Doctor drives the story, gets the best lines, and so on.

Of course my own stuff isn't focussing on the bad guys unless it is
about the bad guy(s).

> Still, there are good villains, bad villains, and "meh" villains?
> and a few, a very few, that stand out so much from the others that
> they say "This is what you should aspire to, if you seek to be on the
> side of evil. Look, and see what a true VILLAIN can be!"

Hm, I think my list would end at my own two main Evil Overlords. ;P

Scanning the names and bits of what you write about them...

> Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula

Hm, not sure if I remember that one, I'm sure I watched the film on TV,
but didn't find any bad guy impressive.

> Number 5: Mr. Bester

Ooh! Someone I know!

For me he was an obstacle to my enjoyment of the show. When he turned
up, things went in a way I don't care to watch.

I don't remember anything about a woman he cared for that you mention.

> Number 2: Davros

Another I know!

Found him lame though. And I've been re-watching Doctor Who those last
weeks, watched the two-parter about the stolen Earth only days ago.
(Btw, throughout the re-watching I kept remembering you saying something
about darker Doctor at the start and other stuff, that I now noticed.)

The two-parter itself was grand, and the scene with towing the Earth
home was epic. But my interest was all with the Doctor and his friends,
the machine was just the reason they were all there doing their thing.
Global or universal threats are part of the show. I really don't see
what you see.

I didn't like the bit you mention about Davros and the Doctor and his
friends in captivity at all. Davros was just rambling on trying to make
things look different. If what he said were true, then it would be a
fault in the writers making it so.

Insane Dalek Khan was actually entertaining.

Well, that's it for those I know. I guess it's no surprise we disagree.
:)


Concerning Doctor Who, maybe you can help me with something. I've
stopped watching with the 3rd new Doctor because he was so totally not
what I watched the show for (quite a feat, dropping my favorite show
ever to not watchable). I heard he's finally gone and there's a 4th new
Doctor. Read a bit about him, but I don't know if he's any closer to
what I liked about the first two new Doctors.

First two were mostly grand shows, with "cheeky comment, grin, duck,
run" personified, full of energy.

3rd was... lame.

So, if you have watched the new one, could you tell me a bit about him?

Also, any pointers on whether I should get the seasons I missed and
endure them to know about anything I missed? Or just read a summary of
specific episodes where important stuff happens? (After all, I now do
have internet, and can try to find summaries.)


--
"... He'll just eat us all whole and spit out the bones with a big,
amused, burb. ..."
-- Dayta imitating what Ranes could have said, Magic Earth V
Excerpts at: <http://home.htp-tel.de/fkoerper/ath/athintro.htm>


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

[Robert Bannister]

On 24/09/2014 12:32 pm, David Johnston wrote:
> On 9/23/2014 8:24 PM, Robert Bannister wrote:
>> On 24/09/2014 6:20 am, David E. Siegel wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:38:48 AM UTC-4, JRStern wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 07:40:56 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
>>>>
>>>> <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Number 10: E. P Arnold Royalton Number 9: Prince Koura Number 8:
>>>>> Ellsworth Toohey Number 7: _Van Helsing_'s Dracula Number 6:
>>>>> Yardiff Bey Number 5: Mr. Bester Number 4: Emperor Palpatine
>>>>> Number 3: Marc C. DuQuesne Number 2: Davros _*Number 1:
>>>>> Orochimaru*_
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos?
>>>> Mr. Mxyzptlk? Gharlane of Eddore? The Mule? Baron Harkonnen?
>>>> Sauron? Hitler? Dick Cheney? Cardinal Richelieu? Auric
>>>> Goldfinger?
>>>>
>>>> This does raise a bit of an issue, there is kind of a shortage of
>>>> really well-formed villains. The enemy tends to be diffuse, The
>>>> System, The Conspiracy, Them, or else a not entirely believable
>>>> cartoon like The Joker.
>>>>
>>>> On your list, I liked Marc DuQuesne the best - though it's been
>>>> decades since I read any Skylark books. I don't even know several
>>>> from your list.
>>>>
>>> I found it interesting that only 2 of the above are from actual
>>> books, most are from movies, only 1 of which i have seen, I think.
>>>
>>> I agree that of the above list DuQuesne is far and away the best, at
>>> least of those I know.
>>>
>>> Sauron of Mordor is tempting, but while a truly immense foe, he does
>>> almost nothign directly and is largely off-stage in LotR.
>>> Melkor/Morgoth (Who corrupted Sauron) is far more active, personally
>>> destroying the Two Trees, and stealing the Silmarils, to say nothing
>>> of his hand-to-hand fight with Finrod Felagund.

>>
>> How much are we restricting this to SF - can we count Moriarty?
>>
>

> One of the problems with Moriarity is that he's largely a product of
> fanon. Moriarity never appears onstage after all in any Sherlock Holmes
> story.

True. I think that makes him scarier.

--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia

[David Johnston]

On 9/23/2014 4:20 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:

> Still there does seem a shortage of high-quality literary villains out there, in spate of the existence of the Evil Overlord List.
>
> -DES
>

Movies have an advantage in the actor's performance if they can really
sell it. However:

Fu Manchu : There are two interesting things about the bad doctor. The
first is that he's actually pretty well motivated. Given what is going
on in China when he starts his career one can hardly blame him for being
out to weaken the British Empire. He's survived when most of the Yellow
Perils are forgotten in part because the author treated him with a bit
more respect and didn't have him be evil for evil's sake, even giving
him a certain degree of a sense of fair play. By the end of the career
the shifting flows of history have him actually coming to the aid of the
British because he now considers the Japanese to be a more significant
problem. Also of course there's the hilarious inefficiency of his
unnecessarily elaborate murder techniques. He once had an agent kill
people by dropping a cat with poisoned claws on them. You can't beat
that kind of homicidal comedy. He's never had a good movie, though.

The Mule: OK so I'm not sure I entirely disapprove of what the Mule's
doing in derailing the plans for a lasting Second Galactic Empire
operated from behind the scenes by the space Illuminati. But he does
inspire a nice mix of pathos and terror (he's high on the list of
characters I would never want to be in the same room with) and as far as
the protagonists are concerned, he's a villain.

The Deaf Man: Not an sf character, but a better execution of the
concept behind the Riddler than the comics ever managed. Also included
for his delightful lack of any motivation except overwhelming egotism.
Although I note that his first scheme involved more terrorism than 9/11
and the nation seemed oddly unaffected by it. Apparently Ed McBain
under-rated the potential paranoia of the American public.

Gollum: Because good villains don't have to be masterminds or
super-powered or even very bright. Sometimes they can just be deranged
hermits with homicidal tendencies.

Simon Delicata: It's true that being unable to feel pain is not really
a superpower. It's actually a terrible handicap. But it does give the
illusion of unstoppability when combined with nearly superhuman size,
strength and durability and the fact that Willie Garvin is terrified of
him helps provide him with initial hype. Also, cool name.

Dolores Umbridge: If you're looking for the villain who inspires the
most loathing in Harry Potter, forget Voldemort. He's small time
compared to Dolores Umbridge, the Defense Against The Dark Arts teacher
with a facade of unconvincing sweetness and a sadistic and tyrannical
nature. She's the avatar of misuse of authority.

The Thing That Looked Like An Old Woman: This most obscure of all
entries comes from "Indian Myths & Legends from the North Pacific Coast
of America: A Translation of Franz Boas' 1895 Edition of Indianische
Sagen von der Nord-Pacifischen Kuste Amerikas" which contains the tale
of some hunters in winter who allow an untalkative old woman to take
shelter with them, only to discover that it is a monster that eats
brains. They hack it on the head with a hatchet then burn the lodge
with it inside, only to discover that it's the Terminator, and what
follows is a cross-country chase that ends only when they lure it onto
thin ice so that it falls through and is carried away by the river.

Unlike most stories collected by the German anthropologist, this one has
no variations from other communities. I'm pretty sure the Indian he was
talking to satisfied the wacky European and his desire to hear a bedtime
story by making up one on the spot. But if he'd lived a few generations
later, what a Hollywood scriptwriter he'd have made.

Dr Impossible: While "Soon I Will Be Invincible" really could have done
more with the hero side of the narrative, Dr. Impossible is adorable for
his self-awareness.

[T Guy]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 8:34:54 PM UTC+1, David DeLaney wrote:

> On 2014-09-23, JRStern <JRS...@foobar.invalid> wrote:
>
> > What no Snidely Whiplash or Boris Badenov? Lex Luthor? Thanos?
>
>
>

> Thanos is another Omnicidal Maniac, in his case because he's head over heels
> in love with Death (the Marvel universe anthropomorphic personification, not
> Gaiman's or Pratchett's), and has vast personal power and powers. Davros beats
> him out on style points by quite a lot.
>
Thanos is a cheap copy of Darkseid. Why have polyester when you can have silk?

[T Guy]

On Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:53:14 PM UTC+1, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:

> On 9/23/14, 11:38 AM, JRStern wrote:

> > Thanos?
>
> He and his opposite-brand Captain Ersatz Darkseid (actually, I think

> it's the other way around -- Darkseid first) certainly both get to play
> in the "Omnicidal Maniac" area, but they didn't quite grab me as much as
> some of the others I listed.

Darkseid was first, in late 1970 or early 1971. Thanos pops up in a 1973 comics for the first time.

[David E. Siegel]

On Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:19:21 AM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
> On 9/23/2014 4:20 PM, David E. Siegel wrote:
>
>
>
> > Still there does seem a shortage of high-quality literary villains out there, in spate of the existence of the Evil Overlord List.
>
> > -DES
>
>
> Movies have an advantage in the actor's performance if they can really
> sell it. However:
>

<Snip Fu Manchu>

>
>
> The Mule: OK so I'm not sure I entirely disapprove of what the Mule's
> doing in derailing the plans for a lasting Second Galactic Empire
> operated from behind the scenes by the space Illuminati. But he does
> inspire a nice mix of pathos and terror (he's high on the list of
> characters I would never want to be in the same room with) and as far as
> the protagonists are concerned, he's a villain.
>

The Mule's realm was, in many ways, an improvement for its average inhabitant over the potpourri of polities that it replaced. If it could have endured, it
might have been an improvement over the planned Second Empire. But its fatal defect was that it depended on the abilities of a single being, and could not
possibly endure long after his death. Since he was sterile, he couldn't even hope for an empowered dynasty. In fact, there should have been hideous
succession wars on the Mule's death, much like those in the real world after the death of Alexander. Asimov handwaved his way past this, because that wasn't
the story he wanted to tell. The renaissance of the Foundation after the death of the Mule is just told, not shown, and pretty much all of the advantages
(tech and organizational) that the Foundation relied on are no longer exclusive to it.

>
> The Deaf Man: Not an sf character, but a better execution of the
> concept behind the Riddler than the comics ever managed. Also included
> for his delightful lack of any motivation except overwhelming egotism.
> Although I note that his first scheme involved more terrorism than 9/11
> and the nation seemed oddly unaffected by it. Apparently Ed McBain
> under-rated the potential paranoia of the American public.
>

Perhaps the "be safe at all costs" meme was not as strong then, and the absence of the 24/7 news cycle might have made a difference also.

>
> Gollum: Because good villains don't have to be masterminds or
> super-powered or even very bright. Sometimes they can just be deranged
> hermits with homicidal tendencies.
>

Gollum is in many ways a Cain-figure. He murdered his brother (best friend?) and has been in effect cursed ever after. But we don't see or even here of him doing much killing, beyond orcs and fish. He was probably willing to kill Sam, but then Sam had favored leaving him to die by the arrows of Faramir's men. He did betray Sam and Frodo into the webs of Shelob, but that is probably his worst action, at least onstage.

>
> Simon Delicata: It's true that being unable to feel pain is not really
> a superpower. It's actually a terrible handicap. But it does give the
> illusion of unstoppability when combined with nearly superhuman size,
> strength and durability and the fact that Willie Garvin is terrified of
> him helps provide him with initial hype. Also, cool name.
>

I don't know that he was unable to *feel* pain as, say someone with Neuropathy is. He just had an inhumanly high pain threshold so that normally he didn't
mind it.

The Modesty Blaise series had a number of pretty good bad guys (although it isn't generally classed as SF -- it could be based on psychic powers in several
books, i think). Brunell from _The Impossible Virgin_ sets up a first class job of brainwashing on Modesty. Gabriel was probably intended at first as a
continuing villain, but only shows up twice. The baddies from _Dead Man's Handle_ are too crazy to be class_A villains, IMO. And there are other good
ones in the books.

<snip Dolores Umbridge>:

>
>
> The Thing That Looked Like An Old Woman: This most obscure of all
> entries comes from "Indian Myths & Legends from the North Pacific Coast
> of America: A Translation of Franz Boas' 1895 Edition of Indianische
> Sagen von der Nord-Pacifischen Kuste Amerikas" which contains the tale
> of some hunters in winter who allow an untalkative old woman to take
> shelter with them, only to discover that it is a monster that eats
> brains. They hack it on the head with a hatchet then burn the lodge
> with it inside, only to discover that it's the Terminator, and what
> follows is a cross-country chase that ends only when they lure it onto
> thin ice so that it falls through and is carried away by the river.
>
> Unlike most stories collected by the German anthropologist, this one has
> no variations from other communities. I'm pretty sure the Indian he was
> talking to satisfied the wacky European and his desire to hear a bedtime
> story by making up one on the spot. But if he'd lived a few generations
> later, what a Hollywood scriptwriter he'd have made.
>

Interesting. One of the perils of folk collecting -- the folk can be imaginative. I'ver read suggestions that some of the info collected by Mead in _Coming of Age in Samoa_ may have been hoaxes by her informants.

>
<snip Dr Impossible>

-DES

[Ted Nolan <tednolan>]

In article <39238f09-3fc0-4257...@googlegroups.com>,

David E. Siegel <sie...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Simon Delicata: It's true that being unable to feel pain is not really
>> a superpower. It's actually a terrible handicap. But it does give the
>> illusion of unstoppability when combined with nearly superhuman size,
>> strength and durability and the fact that Willie Garvin is terrified of
>> him helps provide him with initial hype. Also, cool name.
>>
>I don't know that he was unable to *feel* pain as, say someone with
>Neuropathy is. He just had an inhumanly high pain threshold so that
>normally he didn't
> mind it.
>
>The Modesty Blaise series had a number of pretty good bad guys (although
>it isn't generally classed as SF -- it could be based on psychic powers
>in several
> books, i think). Brunell from _The Impossible Virgin_ sets up a first
>class job of brainwashing on Modesty. Gabriel was probably intended at
>first as a
> continuing villain, but only shows up twice. The baddies from _Dead
>Man's Handle_ are too crazy to be class_A villains, IMO. And there are
>other good
> ones in the books.
>

Modesty's villains sometimes had sense too. One my favorite scenes is
where Modesty has run afoul of a scheme run by several villains.

Modesty is drugged, tied to a chair, probably naked, and has a room full
of guns pointed at her.

One of the villains, who has just arrived on the scene walks into the room.
and visibly blanches.

(approx)

"Ms. Blaise! I had no idea our scheme set us against your interests.
Of course, I completely withdraw my participation will depart
the country immediately. Please accept my apologies."

I believe he was the only survivor..

[Brian M. Scott]

On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 01:19:21 -0600, David Johnston
<Da...@block.net> wrote in <news:m00fle$kbg$1...@dont-email.me>
in rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> Simon Delicata: It's true that being unable to feel pain
> is not really a superpower. It's actually a terrible
> handicap. But it does give the illusion of
> unstoppability when combined with nearly superhuman size,
> strength and durability and the fact that Willie Garvin
> is terrified of him helps provide him with initial hype.
> Also, cool name.

I’m hard-pressed to choose between him and Thaddeus Pilgrim.

[...]

[David Johnston]

On 9/25/2014 8:38 AM, David E. Siegel wrote:

>>
>> Gollum: Because good villains don't have to be masterminds or
>> super-powered or even very bright. Sometimes they can just be
>> deranged hermits with homicidal tendencies.
>>
> Gollum is in many ways a Cain-figure. He murdered his brother (best
> friend?) and has been in effect cursed ever after. But we don't see
> or even here of him doing much killing, beyond orcs and fish. He was
> probably willing to kill Sam, but then Sam had favored leaving him to
> die by the arrows of Faramir's men. He did betray Sam and Frodo into
> the webs of Shelob, but that is probably his worst action, at least
> onstage.

He was going to murder Bilbo if Bilbo couldn't escape.

[Lynn McGuire]

On 9/23/2014 2:59 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote:
> Was it really necessary to quote over 400 lines to add three of
> your own, which consist of a link to Amazon?
>

> Lynn McGuire <l...@winsim.com> wrote in
> news:lvsfmv$94l$1...@dont-email.me:

>
>> On 9/23/2014 6:40 AM, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>>> (NOTE: As with any such list, it's somewhat fluid; I might
>>> make it a little different if I were to write this list
>>> today, but I'm
>>> leaving this one as originally posted)

<snipped a whole lot of good stuff>

>> Dr. Impossible in _Soon I will be Invincible_ should
>> http://www.amazon.com/Soon-Invincible-Vintage-Austin-Grossman
>> /dp/0307279863/
>> be around #2 or #3. You gotta feel for the guy.
>>
>> Lynn

You are welcome!

Lynn

[hamis...@gmail.com]

On Friday, September 26, 2014 12:38:06 AM UTC+10, David E. Siegel wrote:

> Interesting. One of the perils of folk collecting -- the folk can be
>imaginative. I'ver read suggestions that some of the info collected by Mead
>in _Coming of Age in Samoa_ may have been hoaxes by her informants.
>

For some of read virtually all.

[Robert Bannister]

Even so, I have never thought of him as a villain. More a victim who has
gone bad, he is easily led and/or tricked.

[hamis...@gmail.com]

when his first reaction on seeing the one ring is to strangle your best friend I don't think you've got much argument against him being a villain.
Considering that he was exposed to it for a lot less time than any of the companions and they never attacked Frodo for it (Boromir tried to take it but he still didn't kill Frodo and he did cast off the madness)
Hell Bilbo managed to give it away despite carrying it for over 50 years and Sam gave it back to Frodo.
And Sauron was a lot more active in those times than back when Gollum first saw it so presumably the ring was more active.

[David DeLaney]

Point. But even Darkseid has Vast Personal Powers, including but not limited to
his Omega Beams which erase anything they hit from existence (worse than
disintegration, I think we get to hear the tortured screams of the murdered
electrons, and see inverted Kirby Dots draining away), and Vast Power over the
dark New Gods. He doesn't really have _challenges_, other than making those
pesky humans give up the pieces of the Anti-Life Equation.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

[Don Kuenz]

David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:

> The Thing That Looked Like An Old Woman: This most obscure of all
> entries comes from "Indian Myths & Legends from the North Pacific Coast
> of America: A Translation of Franz Boas' 1895 Edition of Indianische
> Sagen von der Nord-Pacifischen Kuste Amerikas" which contains the tale
> of some hunters in winter who allow an untalkative old woman to take
> shelter with them, only to discover that it is a monster that eats
> brains. They hack it on the head with a hatchet then burn the lodge
> with it inside, only to discover that it's the Terminator, and what
> follows is a cross-country chase that ends only when they lure it onto
> thin ice so that it falls through and is carried away by the river.

Imagine, if you will, a mano a mano cat fight between that Thing and
Grendel's mom (_Beowulf_).

--
Don Kuenz

[Kurt Busiek]

Or the Other Thing That Looks Like A Woman, that wrestled Thor to one
knee in Utgard-Loki's castle...

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-09-25, David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:
> Gollum: Because good villains don't have to be masterminds or
> super-powered or even very bright. Sometimes they can just be deranged
> hermits with homicidal tendencies.

Though sometimes a very odd apparently mentally deficient multiple-personality
supposed red herring character IS really a red herring. Walter Plinge, I'm
looking at you, though not too closely because I might start to understand.

> Dolores Umbridge: If you're looking for the villain who inspires the
> most loathing in Harry Potter, forget Voldemort. He's small time
> compared to Dolores Umbridge, the Defense Against The Dark Arts teacher
> with a facade of unconvincing sweetness and a sadistic and tyrannical
> nature. She's the avatar of misuse of authority.

Agreed; she's the villain the series readers HATE. Hate hate hate. Despise and
loathe. Voldemort just kills folks in inventive ways and tortures them and
stuff; he doesn't get anywhere near that level of reaction. (It was HILARIOUS
to watch Mark Oshiro start off thinking she might just be misunderstood...)

And shifting sideways a bit, how about Helen Narbon? (And/or her mother?)

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-09-25, David E. Siegel <sie...@acm.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, September 25, 2014 3:19:21 AM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
>> Gollum: Because good villains don't have to be masterminds or
>> super-powered or even very bright. Sometimes they can just be deranged
>> hermits with homicidal tendencies.
>
> Gollum is in many ways a Cain-figure. He murdered his brother (best friend?)
> and has been in effect cursed ever after.

Best friend, if I recall correctly. And cousin, I see.

> I don't know that he was unable to *feel* pain as, say someone with

the correct kind of

> Neuropathy is.

Cuz let me tell you, the other kind is about as far from "unable to feel pain"
as you can get without actually being Angel from the Wild Cards series.

Dave, have i mentioned OW recently?

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-09-24, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> On 9/24/14, 10:36 AM, Bill Dugan wrote:
>> Voldemort certainly lacks emotional smarts but I'm not so sure about
>> intellectual. Although we don't see it much on-stage, he had to have
>> brains as well as talent to become one of the most powerful wizards of
>> his time.

You'd think so, but ...

> This is what TVTropes calls "Informed Ability" -- we're told how
> brilliant Voldy is, but he never does anything very bright onstage.

...yep. Along with the fact that, while Rowling knitted her setting together
in various interesting ways, she clearly didn't give a lot of THOUGHT to
parts of it, and ...

> Honestly, though, most wizards appear thicker than bricks, so possibly
> "As smart as your average bear" is the supergenius equivalent for most
> wizards.

... and so it's really not that difficult for Yudkowsky's versions of
Voldemort, Potter, Dumbledore, and the rest of the gang to be rather smarter
than the originals even WITHOUT the vast boost in brainpower Potter got. For
example.

(Oh, he found Hitherby Dragons! huzzah!)

> As I was running an RPG campaign, I had to adjust the world to fit the
> fact that not only was I dealing with intelligent players, but they were
> playing characters who would be disrupting the plotline, so everyone --
> most especially the villains -- had to get a lot smarter. (Characters
> included Hermione, Wednesday Addams, Hadji Quest, and Jade Chan)

The First Law of Fanfiction in action, really.

Dave, we can make him better, faster, stronger, more of a trilogy

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-09-24, Ted Nolan <tednolan> <t...@loft.tnolan.com> wrote:
> Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>On Wednesday, September 24, 2014 10:14:46 AM UTC-4, Ted Nolan <tednolan>
>>> James Nicoll <jdni...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> >One of the few times Andrew Wheeler shared one of my review rants
>>> >publicly involved my displeasure that a tie-in novel that used the Silver
>>> >Age Brainiac left out his space-monkey Koko.
>>
>>> >"I protest the deprimatization of the DC Universe . if gorillas and
>>> >monkeys were good enough for Julius Schwartz, they should be good enough
>>> >for us!"
>>
>>> >(Obviously DC kept the human primates: it was the loss of the non-human
>>> >primates I was complaining about).
>>
>>> I'm pretty sure Gorilla Grodd is still out there, and "Angel & The Ape"
>>> had a Foglio series within living memory...
>>
>>... as recently as 1999 the whole line went JLApe.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JLApe:_Gorilla_Warfare!
>>
>>Maybe my subconscious is doing a mashup, but at sometime, somebody (probably
>>Nelson Bridwell) must have had Koko face off with Beppo, or even Gleek.
>>
>>Don't forget M. Mallah, the Doom patrol villain I believe Morrison used him.
>
> And there's always Congorilla..

...and Gorilla Grodd, one of Flash's foes, ruler of Gorilla City in the depths
of Africa.

(The DC Universe has strange and memetic corners where Things Man Was Not Meant
To Reread are tucked away...)

Dave

[Don Bruder]

In article <qfmdnSTtI6IPcLnJ...@earthlink.com>,

David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> On 2014-09-25, David Johnston <Da...@block.net> wrote:
> > Dolores Umbridge: If you're looking for the villain who inspires the
> > most loathing in Harry Potter, forget Voldemort. He's small time
> > compared to Dolores Umbridge, the Defense Against The Dark Arts teacher
> > with a facade of unconvincing sweetness and a sadistic and tyrannical
> > nature. She's the avatar of misuse of authority.
>
> Agreed; she's the villain the series readers HATE. Hate hate hate. Despise and
> loathe.

Gawd, ain't that the truth!

> Voldemort just kills folks in inventive ways and tortures them and
> stuff; he doesn't get anywhere near that level of reaction.

Yup. Probably because, compared to the despicable evil that is Delores,
Voldemort is practically cute-n-cuddly.

--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q

[Robert Carnegie]

On Friday, 26 September 2014 05:55:49 UTC+1, David DeLaney wrote:
> On 2014-09-24, Ted Nolan <tednolan> <t...@loft.tnolan.com> wrote:
> > And there's always Congorilla..
>
> ...and Gorilla Grodd, one of Flash's foes, ruler of Gorilla City
> in the depths of Africa.

Ruler? I thought he was the unfriendly neighbourhood villain.
Like, any time you go to Gorilla City, Grodd is probably hanging
around about to cause trouble. One of those locations where
there only is one villain. With, in this case, the power of
mind control. So, sometimes you get there and he /is/ in
charge.

Anyway, since they changed the universe to one in which
Superman is dating Wonder Woman, maybe Gorilla City - which
/used/ to be a haven for peaceful, civilised gorillas to
avoid contact with less peaceful of civilised humans -
is now Grodd City, home of Gorilla Grodd. Since it seems
that things need to be dumbed down like that.

> (The DC Universe has strange and memetic corners where
> Things Man Was Not Meant To Reread are tucked away...)

Oh, hundreds. About half of all the old-time heroes
have offensive /sidekicks/.

I suppose that gorillas are really no more the Noble Savage
than the savages were, while being no more intrinsically
savage than civilised people are, either. But more muddy.

I have heard an argument that their sexual relations
may be more honourable, on average across the species,
than ours are. But maybe that's about ways in which
males compete with other males. A male gorilla competes
not in sexual performance, but in pounding flat anyone
who comes near his harem. So perhaps "honourable" is
a poor choice of word on my part. I suspect that for
gorillas, feminism is something that happened to other
people. Well, to people.