# Worst Fantasy Villains



## Black Dragon

A few months back I wrote about the characteristics of a villain.

In your estimation, who are some of the worst villains to ever grace the pages of a fantasy novel?

And by "worst," I mean wimpiest, whiniest, most cliched or unmemorable.


----------



## Map the Dragon

Sorry....I have to:

John Boehner????

I'll get back on topic soon. I promise.


----------



## Amanita

HP-seven Voldemort? For some reason, I don't really tend to remember really bad villains.


----------



## Map the Dragon

Somet that come to mind:

Xerxes from 300 - quite strange, a bit whiney.

Prince Humperdinck from Princess Bride - granted this is for comic relief. Still a punk though.

Theon Greyjoy from Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings - glad he died; poor him, daddy didn't love him enough.

Sherrif of Nottingham in most version of the tale - Best whiney moments in Robin Hood Men in Tights

Generic Clich - The overlord with no weakness (save something silly like a magic toenail or something) who ends up getting killed by a weak hero because every time he had the hero in his clutches during the rest of the narrative, he let him go for any number of stupid reasons.

Captain Hook in HOOK - well acted.


----------



## Philip Overby

It's probably a good idea to put spoiler alerts for some of these characters?

I can't think of a specific example, but the worst villains to me are always the over-powered, hate everything type.  They have no depth.  I can't think of an example now, but the stereotype exists for a reason, I just haven't read any books with "dark overlords."  I guess that's a good thing I haven't read them?


----------



## Ravana

Saruman. Should have been a brilliant, menacing figure (doubly so since he ought to have been acting, in his own view, with the best of intentions)--but what we got was a petty, selfish catspaw who went about his business with all the subtlety of a brick. And then he gets offed by a simple knife in the back by his sniveling sidekick: _this_ was supposed to be the mightiest and wisest wizard in the world? If there's one flaw in Tolkien, it's that most of his "evil" characters are just too one-dimensional. The _good _ones can be ambiguous, but the bad guys might as well all be wearing black hats.


----------



## Aegle

Emperor from Goodkind's series. Useless and redundant. lol XD

He was just a big brute, that really held his position far too long, whereas an ideal villain such as 'Darken Rahl'(whom I'm quite enamored by), should have been the final adversary.


----------



## Xanados

Ravana said:


> Saruman. Should have been a brilliant, menacing figure (doubly so since he ought to have been acting, in his own view, with the best of intentions)--but what we got was a petty, selfish catspaw who went about his business with all the subtlety of a brick. And then he gets offed by a simple knife in the back by his sniveling sidekick: _this_ was supposed to be the mightiest and wisest wizard in the world? If there's one flaw in Tolkien, it's that most of his "evil" characters are just too one-dimensional. The _good _ones can be ambiguous, but the bad guys might as well all be wearing black hats.


Actually, I think it's a good thing that, by the end, Saruman isn't actually a powerful figure. It shows that he is weak without Sauron and in the end he is betrayed. Follow evil and you'll get screwed over at the end of the day, basically. I don't think it's complex at all but it works.


----------



## pskelding

All villains in the Star Wars Prequel trilogy were lame... every one.  

The unmemorable ones are so unmemorable I can't remember them, so either they are good for that reason or bad!


----------



## Philip Overby

They almost screwed up Darth Vader with this re-release on Bluray.  He screams "Nooooo!" at the final climatic moment.  Geez.


----------



## ShortHair

I vote for any and all villains in the Dragonlance series.


----------



## Ravana

Xanados said:


> Actually, I think it's a good thing that, by the end, Saruman isn't actually a powerful figure. It shows that he is weak without Sauron and in the end he is betrayed. Follow evil and you'll get screwed over at the end of the day, basically. I don't think it's complex at all but it works.



The problem I have with that is that he was a powerful figure--the head of Gandalf's "order"--well _before_ he started following Sauron. He impressed people like Elrond and Galadriel. I don't see why he ought to lose that simply because he became evil. At the beginning of the story, he could imprison Gandalf; by the time we actually encounter him in the book, he can't even manage parlor tricks. (Even Radagast the Aftertho--uh, "Brown"--could at least talk to birds....) I've mentioned in the past that Tolkien's magic tends to be largely low-key--we never see Gandalf _do_ all that much, for instance--but the _only_ thing we see Saruman do is talk down to people (literally and figuratively)... and Goebbels got farther with that without any magic on his side. I mean, seriously: his plan to take over the world revolved around cross-breeding orcs and humans? What kind of "wise" (that is, "intelligent") wizard is going to trust his fate to _orcs_?


----------



## myrddin173

While technically Saruman was the head of the Istari it was Gandalf who was actually the "greatest."  He just didn't want to come to Middle-earth, so Saruman claimed the leader position.  Cirdan recognized this when they arrived in the Grey Havens which is why he gave his Ring to Gandalf not Saruman.  Galadriel also knew this because she wanted Gandalf to be the head of the White Council but again he refused.  Also I think Saruman's greatest power was always his voice, Gandalf warns Theodan and Co about it when they visit Isengard.

To answer the question though I would have to say DomDaniel from Angie Sage's Septimus heap series.  He always seemed a bit buffoonish while all of the characters are scared of him.


----------



## Ravana

Oh, his "greatest" power is definitely his voice--about which Gandalf shouldn't have need to warn those accompanying him when they went to Isengard; they ought to have acquired plenty of caution in that respect by then. But like I said: propagandists and professional advertisers accomplish more than Saruman did, _without_ the benefit of magic.

I'm just wondering what his _second_ greatest power was... tiddlywinks?

He may not be "worst," on most people's lists, but he's certainly "most disappointing" on mine. Could have been so much more....


----------



## Sinitar

Galbatorix from Eragon. Being a villains means staying in a castle while others fear your name. That's the worst kind of villain I can think about.


----------



## mythique890

Any villain that goes around kicking puppies and stealing candy from children just to show how 'evil' they truly are.  The most common form of this I see is neverending minion abuse.  What minion would stick around for that?  If you have followers, there has to be _something_ about you that's admirable/loveable, or there was at one point.  

I also don't go for the motivated by insanity thing, unless it's well done and there's more to it than that.  It's too easy.


----------



## Whitefur

Can I make a generalization? I have a strong dislike for boring villains. They're that kind of villains whose motives are evil in the way of pure evil, like "I'm doing this to destroy that thing because I want to, not because it does any kind of good to me). They're the villains who never bother to mask their simple personalities behind a more complex facade, and they're the ones who are way too stuck up. Was someone close to me killed by some guy/guys? I'll take revenge on them.
Is someone resisting my rule, which I consider to be perfect? I'm going to crush them, no matter what that implies.
Do I have something against that character, who always pisses me off? I'm going to kill him, but you know, I'll take my time with it, even if I have all the power I need to take him down before he has the chance to begin his epic quest because that's how I roll.


----------



## Johnny Cosmo

> I also don't go for the motivated by insanity thing, unless it's well done and there's more to it than that. It's too easy.



I agree completely. It's easy, boring, and a load of nonsense. It's always _selective _insanity. When villains are insane they seem to retain their mental capabilities, as well as their ability to function and to think clearly. The only thing they seem to lose is morality, and they're always power hungry. _Why?_​


----------



## Digital_Fey

Agree with Sinitar. Admittedly, if you want to be a long-lived villain then you probably *should* stay in a castle while others fear your name, but it doesn't help the story 

To generalize: my least favorite villains are the ones who _never die_. They fall into a pit of boiling lava at the end of book one, and come book six they're still hanging around, in their tenth reincarnation now, getting more emo and less scary all the time. Also, the ones who became evil because of some vaguely mentioned past trauma - as if that actually gives them any moral complexity.


----------



## Ravana

Johnny Cosmo said:


> I agree completely. It's easy, boring, and a load of nonsense. It's always _selective _insanity. When villains are insane they seem to retain their mental capabilities, as well as their ability to function and to think clearly. The only thing they seem to lose is morality, and they're always power hungry. _Why?_​



Which means they aren't actually "insane"--and that the author doesn't understand insanity, he's just using the word as an excuse to be lazy. I agree: don't say your villain is "insane" unless he really is, and you're prepared to demonstrate it. Same with Digital_Fey's "vague trauma": even if it _isn't_ vague, but precisely and painfully detailed, it's still not an excuse for becoming a villain. For every person who's gone bad because he didn't get a pony for his fifth birthday, there are thousands of (largely) normal people who worked through it and went on to non-villainous lives. So, basically, using this as a device should be a way to indicate how pathetic an individual your villain is, not how (much less why) evil. 

The ones who never die irk me as well--at least the ones who never die when they _ought_ to have died. The ones who simply escape, thanks to some well-conceived contingency plan, are fine. The "mysterious death" of comic books (i.e. no corpse) always bothers me (I know why it initially came about... doesn't mean it has to see continued use), and I see little reason for it to have any place in prose writing. Though I must add that one of the problems the WildStorm comic titles have is that the protagonists almost always, quite rationally, kill their opponents--and a lack of repeat villains does detract somewhat from what one comes to expect from comic-book storylines. (Not to mention making the writer's job much more difficult.)

The reason the villains (insane or otherwise) are all power-hungry and immoral is probably the same as the reason heroes are all strong-willed and perseverant: those are the ones you hear about. The rest never do anything worth telling stories about... or, at best, they're good for one story, as exemplars of abject failure in their field.  I mean, seriously: imagine an antagonist who is always chivalrous and charitable, and who doesn't give a damn who's running things? Ooh... there's an exciting challenge for a hero to overcome. 

Though, actually, that, plus the word "challenge," gives me an idea.... 

***

Edit: Challenge up!


----------



## Guy

Digital_Fey said:


> my least favorite villains are the ones who _never die_. They fall into a pit of boiling lava at the end of book one, and come book six they're still hanging around, in their tenth reincarnation now, getting more emo and less scary all the time.


Biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig +1 on that! Man, I could rant for pages about that.


			
				Ravana said:
			
		

> Same with Digital_Fey's "vague trauma": even if it isn't vague, but precisely and painfully detailed, it's still not an excuse for becoming a villain. For every person who's gone bad because he didn't get a pony for his fifth birthday, there are thousands of (largely) normal people who worked through it and went on to non-villainous lives. So, basically, using this as a device should be a way to indicate how pathetic an individual your villain is, not how (much less why) evil.


I've read a fair amount about serial killers, despots and sexual predators to try and understand evil people, and the concluson I've reached is that when you strip away all the trappings, they really _are_ pathetic people. When you look at what makes an evil person, what motivates him, how he thinks, it inevitably turns out to be something pathetic, childish, and/or petty. Look at the number one example of evil in our time - Hitler. Read his suicide not. If the ideas expressed in it ain't pathetic and childish, I don't know what is. Evil people tend to have enormous egos and pride, to a degree most adults would consider infantile. Just as we want to know what motivates the hero, we want to know what motivates the villain. If he's motivated by some warped sense of morals, he's deceiving himself. He's refusing to face realitity. He's rationalizing, justifying. He's doing wrong and on some deep level he knows it, but he refuses to admit it, even to himself. If you ever read about the gunmen and outlaws of the American West, you'll see a recuring theme of "everyone I killed was in self-defense" or "they all deserved it." Read prison interviews with serial killers. They rarely take responsibility for their actions. I think the source of most - if not all - human evil is self-deception, refusing to honestly look at things, refusing to take responsibility, and someone who does that, regardless of how they dress themselves up, is petty and childish, and a writer developing a villain will ultimately end up at that point. I tend to agree with the criticisms about Anakin's/Vader's character development in the Star Wars prequels. I have a lot of criticisms for those movies in general, but the theme I think Lucas was going for - that underneath all of Vader's black armor and that sinister exterior lurked a truly pathetic individual - I'm totally on board with. I think it's the flip side of developing the hero in such a way was to show his flaws, weaknesses, doubts, etc. I think perfect villains are as boring as perfect heroes. I like to see heroes who, underneath their strong confidant appearances, have doubts and fears and insecurities (as long as they aren't too numerous, else the hero also becomes pathetic) and occasionally makes the wrong choice or takes the wrong course of action. The flip side is villains who, underneath their arrogant, sinister, invincible appearances are really pathetic, weak, frightened people.


----------



## Misusscarlet

Worst evil doer ever. Grendel. Worst period. Though he was also misunderstood in a lot of ways. But he was still a terrible evil creature.


----------



## Garren Jacobsen

Galbatorix for me. I just don't like the he's bad because he's nuts nonsense. Not a compelling reason for me to fear him or really even dislike him. Quite the fail if you be asking me.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

I had to reach for a minute to remember who Galbatorix was. I'll have to agree. He's sort of randomly insanely evil, without having the epic supernatural demigodness of someone like Sauron.

Still, I'm interested to see how Inheritance ends... if it ever does. PAOLINI, Y U NO WRITE FASTER?


----------



## KingArthur

I agree with Aegle the emperor was not even effective as a bad guy. Point's only go to those that get something done.


----------



## KingArthur

And Scar from the lion king you get no points for terrorizing a child.


----------



## Centerfield97

Map the Dragon said:


> Somet that come to mind:
> 
> Xerxes from 300 - quite strange, a bit whiney.
> 
> Prince Humperdinck from Princess Bride - granted this is for comic relief. Still a punk though.
> 
> Theon Greyjoy from Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings - glad he died; poor him, daddy didn't love him enough.
> 
> Sherrif of Nottingham in most version of the tale - Best whiney moments in Robin Hood Men in Tights
> 
> Generic Clich - The overlord with no weakness (save something silly like a magic toenail or something) who ends up getting killed by a weak hero because every time he had the hero in his clutches during the rest of the narrative, he let him go for any number of stupid reasons.
> 
> Captain Hook in HOOK - well acted.



Didn't even think of Theon, he died pretty much after only a few PoV chapters lol


----------



## Elder the Dwarf

Map the Dragon said:


> Somet that come to mind:
> 
> Sherrif of Nottingham in most version of the tale - Best whiney moments in Robin Hood Men in Tights



I thought my brother and I were the only people in the world that knew about Men in Tights.  Hilarious movie.  

And King Arthur how dare you diss Lion King?  Scar was very convincing and frightening to my five year old self.  I agree with the Galbatorix comments, but I'm wondering what some of you guys would give as a background for a villain.  Most criminals I can think of come from a rough childhood: abusive parents, forced to commit crimes, etc.  I don't see why this shouldn't translate to villains in a novel.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne

Centerfield97 said:


> Didn't even think of Theon, he died pretty much after only a few PoV chapters lol



What makes you think Theon's dead?


----------



## Klee Shay

Lord Foul from the Thomas Covenant books. Too clichÃ© for me. Strange I should say that.


----------



## Aidan of the tavern

I have to complain about the prequel Star Wars villains as well.  I liked the originals, like Moff Tarkin and Jabba the Hutt, but the characters who were bad guys simply because they were evil through and through?  Doesn't do it for me.  Apart from Dooku, because I'm a big Chris Lee fan.  At the risk of an argument I have a lot of complaints regarding the prequels, but we've all been there before so I'll shut up now.


----------



## Reaver

*Peter the Puppy's Most Wanted...*

*Psy-Crow* from Earthworm Jim--Wait, this is the list for greatest villains of all time, right?


----------



## Anders Ã„mting

pskelding said:


> All villains in the Star Wars Prequel trilogy were lame... every one.



Says _you._ 

Count Dooku was delightfully arrogant and occasionally hilarious. ("Oh no! This is not _my_ fault! They've gone too far! This is madness!")

It's really too bad they turned him into "Darth Vader without the helmet" in the Clone Wars cartoons. They had exactly one Sith Lord who actually seemed to have a sense of humour and they totally dropped the ball.

Oh, and General Grievous is one of my all time favourite villains. Ever. Period.



Phil the Drill said:


> They almost screwed up Darth Vader with this re-release on Bluray.  He screams "Nooooo!" at the final climatic moment.  Geez.



I will never understand why people object to that so much.

I thought it was totally in character, and a nice echo to Luke's "Nooooo!" in TESB as well.


----------



## urcool91

pskelding said:


> All villains in the Star Wars Prequel trilogy were lame... every one.
> 
> The unmemorable ones are so unmemorable I can't remember them, so either they are good for that reason or bad!



But OMG wasn't Darth Maul awesome? I wish he hadn't died :frown2:.


----------



## charleshudgen

The worst villain character for me,  I would say Black heart from Ghost Rider. Also, I'm not saying this one is the worst, just want to add variation. I'm not pleased with how they did Two Face in The Dark Knight. The first half was great and the changes with how they made him Two Face worked, but he's a villain who deserves more than being an after thought in the Joker movie. And then killing him at the end in that way was lame.


----------



## Aravelle

KingArthur said:


> And Scar from the lion king you get no points for terrorizing a child.



I have mixed feelings on this. Scar was not the villian to me, you see. Mufasa was. Mufasa wanted all of the meat to himself, so he drove the poor hyenas away to eat rotten elephant jerky. Scar was only a bad ruler due to his stubbornness and the drought, he had fought so long for the Pridelands that he had no intentions on leaving.


----------



## Feo Takahari

I suppose it's cheating to name awful villains from awful books. (Succiu in _Chronicles of Blood and Stone_ is painfully one-dimensional, but she's arguably better-written than most of the rest of the cast.) So, bad villains from books that are actually decent . . .

Javanne in _The Dying Earth_. We never learn anything about who she really is or why she allied with the demons, and she never has a stronger motivation than arbitrary sadism. She could have been used as an example of the banality of evil, but instead, she's just banal. (Compare Liane, who's almost likeable despite being a thug and a murderer, and Mazirian, who's so awful he becomes compelling.)


----------



## WyrdMystic

Voltan(?) Hawk the Slayer. So bad cant remember if that's the right name. Whiney, cliched, pitiful. My brother got the girl....boohoo. she scarred me....boohoo. I killed her....boohoo.


----------



## thedarknessrising

charleshudgen said:


> The worst villain character for me,  I would say Black heart from Ghost Rider. Also, I'm not saying this one is the worst, just want to add variation. I'm not pleased with how they did Two Face in The Dark Knight. The first half was great and the changes with how they made him Two Face worked, but he's a villain who deserves more than being an after thought in the Joker movie. And then killing him at the end in that way was lame.



i feel the same way. i was hoping he'd be the villain for the next installment, The Dark Knight Rises, but nooooooo, they had to kill him!


----------



## Devor

Map the Dragon said:


> Theon Greyjoy from Game of Thrones and Clash of Kings - glad he died; poor him, daddy didn't love him enough.



Joffrey is worse.  At least Theon _wants_ something, and he grabs it for a moment.  He's stupid, but he's at least a player in the Game of Thrones, one of the first to lose.  Joffrey, on the other hand, is a spoiled idiot who likes to terrorize everyone, who thinks he's playing the game but is only just the wildcard disaster deck you draw a card from when you roll snake eyes.  He's a total failure as a villain.




Johnny Cosmo said:


> I agree completely. It's easy, boring, and a load of nonsense. It's always _selective _insanity. When villains are insane they seem to retain their mental capabilities, as well as their ability to function and to think clearly. The only thing they seem to lose is morality, and they're always power hungry. _Why?_​



Err . . . . it's pretty typical for the mentally ill to have above-average intelligence.  A lot of mental illnesses are about causing drama, hating your friends, obsessing over specific ideas, or thinking only about yourself.  Psychologists sometimes analyze famous characters like Darth Vader or Tony Soprano, and they often fit pretty comfortably into some cluster of the commonly defined personality disorders.

So, I would say mental illnesses are a great place to look for creating villain characters.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith

Theon Greyjoy is not dead... The rumors of his demise have been greatly exaggerated.

Joffrey is supposed to be a bad villain. He's a demented child that lacks any redeeming qualities. The only thing that Joffrey has that readers can sympathize with is the love of his mother. In my opinion, the Joffrey character is a vehicle used to carry the more interesting character that is Cersei.


----------



## Darkblade

I agree with almost every villain mentioned thus is awful but I believe the worst villain I have ever read would have to be Valentine Morgenstern from the Mortal Instruments series. 

He started off as a harmless enough generic fallen hero before his big plan is revealed in the third book. I could go on long spoilery rants about how insanely dumb that plan was. Before we even get into the largely uneeded child switching and other convoluted aspects that only serve to lengthen the books there is the fact that, (spoilers) his plan hinges on an Angel killing it's chosen Holy warriors.

The fact that no one else seems to see that hole in his plan only makes it worse.


----------



## Reaver

Darryl Jenks in "Coming to America" and Ross Webster in "Superman III".


----------



## The Writer's Realms

Viserys from Game of Thrones. He doesn't last too long in the story line, but still, least favorite villain/character.


----------



## psychotick

Hi,

I'd have to go for Sauron from Lord of the Rings. After all what do we really know about him? He sits in a tower with an eye, you never see him, he doesn't actually say anything, and he sends all his lieutenants out to die. Then a ring ends up in lava and he's gone. Pretty lame for a villain. I mean even the Godfather had some lines!

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## Feo Takahari

I think the idea behind Sauron was supposed to be that he was the endstage of Motive Decay. There was a time when he actually had high ideals, but now he just wants to rule the world for no better reason than that he can.


----------



## Sheriff Woody

I like the fact that Sauron is more of a force than a character.


----------



## NovaPowered

T.Allen.Smith said:


> Theon Greyjoy is not dead... The rumors of his demise have been greatly exaggerated.
> 
> Joffrey is supposed to be a bad villain. He's a demented child that lacks any redeeming qualities. The only thing that Joffrey has that readers can sympathize with is the love of his mother. In my opinion, the Joffrey character is a vehicle used to carry the more interesting character that is Cersei.



Agreed, Joffrey is a whiny little sod. The way he gets ruled by his mother is both pathetic and intruiging as it shows the strength of Cersei's character because she can easily control a king. And as you said, he is a total vechicle.


----------



## aliciamarie

It is isane how much I agree with all of these. I am trying to think of one that wasn't mentioned yet.


----------

