|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 28, 2017 12:06:58 GMT -5
I find money to be a more reasonable motive than most. I tend to have a hard time with the "try to take over the world thing". It's just not realistic...and yes I know how silly that sounds when talking about people who run around in longjohns and fly. "I got a freeze ray and I'm going to use it to knock over a bank" makes a lot more sense. Both usually come off as implausible to me. Ruling the world sounds good when you're six. Once you get a little older, you start to wonder who would actually want that job. That's an immense amount of pressure and responsibility, even if you just want to run it in order to serve your own whims and interests. At the very least, rebels and other would-be dictators are going to be coming at you at all times, and you'll spend more time defending your right to rule than actually enjoying it. As for the money angle, it's nearly impossible to pull off any of the schemes we see in comics and then go back to a normal life without getting caught. Stealing a priceless jewel or painting? Good luck selling that! Stealing sacks full of money from the bank? Where are you going to stow that without someone noticing it? As a result, I never buy into either of these motives unless they are executed in a particularly convincing fashion. I absolutely believe, for example, that Dr. Doom has carefully considered why he wants to rule the world and how he would handle it. Oh yeah...jewels and paintings make zero sense unless you already have a buyer lined up. Money actually isn't that hard to launder...and it was a WHOLE lot easier to deal with in the late 50s and through the 60s. It still wasn't unusual for payrolls to be paid in cash and there was very little oversight of large cash transactions. The U.S. was largely a cash economy until well into the 70s. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jul 28, 2017 12:07:03 GMT -5
My favorite motivation - and one that's sadly disappeared after the Silver Age - is villains who do it for the applause. The Jester - who appeared in Daredevil 42-45, just a couple issues before the pages I posted - saw "masked criminal" as an extension of his acting career. And Bill Finger's version of the Penguin always seemed to view crime as performance art. The Post-Crisis Prankster still did this. It may be a less popular motive today, but it's still out there. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jul 28, 2017 12:10:41 GMT -5
He wanted a feather because that was the deal he had with the town. It doesn't say why his ancestors wanted a passenger pigeon feather, but I think Mister Twister had a case; There was a contract and the town broke it. He also understood why it was impossible for them to honor it. If someone owes you something, and you know they can't pay it through no fault of their own, you don't show up to cause trouble about it unless you're expecting some other kind of recompense. Why assemble a costume, wreck havoc, and attempt to murder people if you don't actually want something from them? |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jul 28, 2017 12:13:20 GMT -5
Then there's X-men villain syndrome.
If you flesh out your villains too much they become sympathetic enough that they don't work as villains: So if Magneto, the Juggernaut, Emma Frost and Mystique all turn good, you don't really have any good villains left!
Which is why X-men comics today are all "I'm Evil Shovel Man! C'mon out here, mutants, and I'ma hit you with my shovel! My shovel of evil!"
(At least I assume. What else can you do when you don't have any decent bag guys?)
|
|
|
|
Post by Outrajs on Jul 28, 2017 12:18:16 GMT -5
World domination doesn't necessarily mean evil in the non-traditional sense. Why do they want to rule the world? Do they want to make it their version of better? And just because they don't subscribe to modern definitions (or modern for their times) of right and wrong and good and evil that doesn't necessarily make them evil....misguided maybe. Evil and good are pretty human constructs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jul 28, 2017 12:20:19 GMT -5
He wanted a feather because that was the deal he had with the town. It doesn't say why his ancestors wanted a passenger pigeon feather, but I think Mister Twister had a case; There was a contract and the town broke it. He also understood why it was impossible for them to honor it. If someone owes you something, and you know they can't pay it through no fault of their own, you don't show up to cause trouble about it unless you're expecting some other kind of recompense. Why assemble a costume, wreck havoc, and attempt to murder people if you don't actually want something from them? Textbook lawful evil. "It doesn't matter that what I'm asking for is impossible, all that matters is that YOU owe ME, and you did not pay up!" For more examples consult page 1-46 of your local paper, or watch C-SPan for an hour. |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 28, 2017 12:28:41 GMT -5
He wanted a feather because that was the deal he had with the town. It doesn't say why his ancestors wanted a passenger pigeon feather, but I think Mister Twister had a case; There was a contract and the town broke it. He also understood why it was impossible for them to honor it. If someone owes you something, and you know they can't pay it through no fault of their own, you don't show up to cause trouble about it unless you're expecting some other kind of recompense. Why assemble a costume, wreck havoc, and attempt to murder people if you don't actually want something from them? That's why he didn't sue them. Because impossibility of performance is a defense in contract law. Mister Twister knew his day in court wouldn't get him what he wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jul 28, 2017 12:37:19 GMT -5
Oh yeah...jewels and paintings make zero sense unless you already have a buyer lined up. Oh I don't know...if there were paintings they really loved and wanted for themselves... or someone like Magpie who simply had to have the shiny things (and wasn't exactly sane anyway). |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 28, 2017 12:43:48 GMT -5
Oh yeah...jewels and paintings make zero sense unless you already have a buyer lined up. Oh I don't know...if there were paintings they really loved and wanted for themselves... or someone like Magpie who simply had to have the shiny things (and wasn't exactly sane anyway). Sure. But for Captain Cold to break in to the Central City Museum to steal valuable paintings for their value makes very little sense. Unless someone hired him to steal them or he had a fence lined up. Art and jewels are very hard to get rid of and the thief tends to get pennies on the dollar for their worth. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2017 12:57:43 GMT -5
A while back during the DC New 52 ... I stopped reading Justice League of the America completely when they added Lex Luthor and Captain Cold to the team that's marked my end of reading this iconic group forever and never, ever looked at another JLA book again until Justice League Canada and briefly that JLA book that has Steve Trevor, Hawkman, Martian Manhunter, and etc. Those books did not do any justice at all and after a few issues of these two below-average teams ... No more JLA books for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jul 28, 2017 14:44:46 GMT -5
World domination doesn't necessarily mean evil in the non-traditional sense. Why do they want to rule the world? Do they want to make it their version of better? And just because they don't subscribe to modern definitions (or modern for their times) of right and wrong and good and evil that doesn't necessarily make them evil....misguided maybe. Evil and good are pretty human constructs. Maybe the world would be better with a super-genius in charge? By which I mean ALL HAIL GOD-EMPEROR DOOM! Interesting thoughts - There's probably a book in there about what we mean when we say "evil" in popular culture. In a smaller, less philosophical sense, it' generally makes for better comics if the villains are (at worst) relatable and (at best) simply espousing a different, albeit still morally defensible, philosophy than the protagonists. |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,874
|
Post by shaxper on Jul 28, 2017 15:38:52 GMT -5
World domination doesn't necessarily mean evil in the non-traditional sense. Why do they want to rule the world? And there's the crux of it. To quote a completely fictitious number that I just guessed at now, 95% of villains who have made it their goal to take over the world have never bothered to explain why they want to do this. There are far easier ways to get everything you want. |
|
|
|
Post by Reptisaurus! on Jul 28, 2017 15:51:27 GMT -5
From Avengers # 290, by Roger Stern
Dr. Druid: And once you have conquered the people of Earth, what then?
Super-Adaptoid: I will rule them, Dr. Druid.
Dr. Druid: To rule means to dictate. What will you tell your billions of subjects to do?
Super-Adaptoid: I... I had not yet considered that.
|
|
|
|
Post by badwolf on Jul 28, 2017 16:07:36 GMT -5
World domination doesn't necessarily mean evil in the non-traditional sense. Why do they want to rule the world? Do they want to make it their version of better? And just because they don't subscribe to modern definitions (or modern for their times) of right and wrong and good and evil that doesn't necessarily make them evil....misguided maybe. Evil and good are pretty human constructs. Maybe the world would be better with a super-genius in charge? By which I mean ALL HAIL GOD-EMPEROR DOOM! Interesting thoughts - There's probably a book in there about what we mean when we say "evil" in popular culture. In a smaller, less philosophical sense, it' generally makes for better comics if the villains are (at worst) relatable and (at best) simply espousing a different, albeit still morally defensible, philosophy than the protagonists. I have to admit, I do sometimes find myself siding with Ra's al Ghul. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Jul 28, 2017 16:50:10 GMT -5
Maybe the only villains who are really evil for the sake of being evil would be the ones like Marvel's Mephisto who more or less embody the Judaeo-Christian concept of metaphysical Evil.
Even Loki in Norse mythology, even though he was instrumental in bringing about Ragnarok, can be seen from another POV as also an instrument of change and renewal and therefore not simply Evil.
|
|
