What Makes a Good Villain?

What indeed? Every story needs some form of antagonist, an opposing force to give the story conflict, otherwise the story is quite boring. The antagonist can com in the form of a person, but can also be internal like when the protagonist has conflicting desires or values. Of course, the most intense and exciting form of an antagonist is the villain: when the antagonist has evil intentions.

As an avid reader and movie-watcher, I have come across many, many villains throughout my life. Villains are often my favorite part of a story. Some I remember, some I don’t. What is it about certain ones that makes them memorable? I have been thinking about it and realized that a lot of the memorable and forgettable ones have many of the same characteristics, but some just stand out more than others. What is it?

First off, I believe that a hero is only as good as their villain. If the villain is lame, then the story is lame. The hero can be lame, but if the villain is good, I think the story can be saved... It’s kind of interesting. I believe it’s because the villain is the main source of the conflict and the conflict is what makes the story interesting. I mean, obviously other factors play in and can also save it, but when it comes down to the raw core of the thing, it’s all about the hero and villain in most cases. Let me give two examples: GOOD: Sir Percy Blakeney and Chauvelin from The Scarlet Pimpernel. BAD: Pocahontas and Governor Ratcliffe from Disney’s Pocahontas. 

Chauvelin from The Scarlet Pimpernel (1982)

Sir Percy and Chauvelin are a good example because they are equally matched. Both are clever in their own way, Chauvelin is threatening and conniving, Percy is mysterious, neither knows what each other is thinking, you can really feel the suspense and tension between the two characters. There is a real threat present. 

Governor Ratcliffe from Pocahontas

As for Pocahontas, Ratcliffe is threatening to the land and Pocahontas’s people, but he is pretty generic. He talks big and he is greedy, but there is not an overwhelming tension or threat. Even though what he does is bad, he is just so bland and generic about it, you forget about it as soon as the movie is over. He is just a prissy, greedy, white guy with the same old boring prejudices who wants money and power and will do anything to get it.

This brings me to my next point: motive. Even though I don’t feel that this is the most important factor when making a villain (because many of my favorite villains have some of the silliest motives, like Maleficent from Sleeping Beauty), I do think that it can definitely contribute. Common motives include revenge, power, and greed, sometimes all three. If a writer can come up with a very original and interesting motive, that will stick with readers/viewers and that will help them remember the villain. Not that there’s anything particularly wrong with the common motives, it’s just that sometimes if something is rehashed so many times, people get bored and don’t pay attention. On the other end of the scale, sometimes I think writers get so wrapped up in the motive, they don’t bother to flesh out anything else about their villains.

This ties in to my next point which is show. How do they display their power or their villainy? Whether it's a subtle, clever villain or a flamboyant, eccentric one, how is that displayed? Sometimes, I think that-- especially movie writers-- like to cover up their bland villains with a lot of show. Marvel in particular really has a problem with this. How many Marvel villains do you actually remember? Let me guess... Is it Loki? Nobody else? Maybe one or two others just vaguely? 

Let me explain why this is. In the moment while you’re watching the film, you get excited by the villain and their plot. You cheer for the hero(es) and you want the villain defeated. However, by the time the movie is over, you completely forget the villain and probably even their name. While watching it, you’re very wrapped up in it, but afterwards... nothing. That’s because of show. The explosions, the imminent threat, your fear for the hero’s safety in the moment. But stop and think about it for a minute. Their plots are usually either sort of bland or overly complicated, they have no qualities that make them stand out, they’re not clever, sometimes they don’t even have an interesting design. 

Now, I come to the one villain in the Marvel universe everyone remembers: Loki. Why him? Yes, he is showy like many of the others and often has a generic and/or overly complicated plan. However, he has other qualities that make him stand out. One, he is the brother of one of the heroes making it legitimately tragic; two, he is actually clever and sly, not all show; three, he is kind of funny, not all quips and generic bantering; four, he has feelings, we see him get more than just angry and angrier and furious and mad, we see him get sad and happy and such; five, his costume is awesome; six, his power is memorable and interesting, and he uses it to his advantage in interesting ways; Lastly, his actor, Tom Hiddleston, is brilliant!

So you see, there are many contributing factors in making Loki memorable. You cannot just give someone a scary look, have them cackle and twirl their mustache, and call them a villain. There’s much more to it than that.

There are two main types of villains, I believe (which can be sub-categorized): The clever, subtle ones, and the psycho, chaotic ones. I really like both. The Joker from the Batman comics is one of my all-time favorite villains. It sort of depends on what version you’re looking at, but ideally, he’s the definition of psycho meets clever. The Dark Knight, in particular, delves deep into this. He is the pure definition of anarchy in that movie. But, in any version, you can see how twisted this guy is. A lot of the time, he has no motive and is just there to “have some fun”. He and Batman are equally matched and his power is shown is brilliant ways. He can be totally hilarious and then downright terrifying. He is unbelievably smart, but his genius is so twisted. I love this villain so much! His design is bizarrely interesting, he can be funny, he’s completely crazy, he’s intelligent, he’s scary, he’s up for the challenge of Batman. He's a great villain!

Something else writers like to do is give the villain a tragic backstory, try to make their motives more understandable and/or make the villain more relatable... and a lot of the time this falls flat on its face. A classic example of this is Darth Vader from the Star Wars movies. Darth Vader is one of the most iconic villains in cinematic history. His first introduction was so chilling. A large ominous figure standing over dead bodies, that breathing, his voice. He was terrifying. With the original Star Wars movies, you get a sense of his background through conversations and you realize the tragedy of it. It was brilliantly done, but despite this, you still feared him. and he was still interesting. In fact, his background made him more interesting. 

But then, the prequels came out and we had to actually watch his backstory. Without giving away spoilers (just in case someone's reading this who hasn't seen Star Wars... weirdos ;P), just seeing Darth Vader, a villain so menacing and revered, in that form as a whiny, "tragic" kid, ruined his image for a lot of people. My point is, villains don't always need a backstory. I mean, sometimes it works and it does make them more interesting or tragic, even relatable. But why does the villain have to be relatable? Isn't it the hero we're supposed to be relating to? This is becoming a major problem nowadays. The villain always needs a tragic past and needs to the audience to sympathize with them. Then when it doesn't work, it just makes them look pathetic. Yes, sometimes the backstory gives reason to why the villain is doing what they're doing and helps the audience understand better, but for heaven's sake, make it interesting and not generic! And even more, don't let it ruin the villain's image! One last point, sometimes it's OK for the villain to be evil for the sake of being evil. Some psychos out there, as Alfred from Batman says, "Just like to watch the world burn". That can be just as interesting to watch if it is done properly.


A lot of movies think that if a villain looks scary, kills lots of people, yells a lot, has an evil laugh, and whatnot, they’re a good villain. Not true. While that stuff can contribute, a good villain has to have so much more. Don’t be blinded by show. It’s like being distracted by a shiny object. Villains are just as important to the story as everything else. Without them, there would be no conflict and the story would fall flat on its face. Pay attention to them!