A reader, Jose, writes:
"This is something
that, obviously, I'm very interested in getting your views on.”
“Since your writing
voice and passion are always so cheery, I'd like to take you to the Dark Side
for a moment. In short: Who are your all-time favorite villains from the world
of genre cinema and cult TV?”
“Favorite is a broad
term... this could mean that you thought they were genuinely frightening or
painfully inept and humorous, or just downright cool. Let us know why you're
attracted to these black hats and femme fatales."
Jose, that's a terrific question because a powerful or dynamic villain often represents the difference
between a genre film's success or failure. More often than not, the
villain is the character who drives the film's action, eliciting
the actions/response of the protagonist or hero in the process.
In other words, the
villain is really a narrative's catalyst.
I tend not to prefer
very conventional villains, the ones who simply seek more wealth, or are
motivated wholly by revenge or insanity.
Instead, the villains I
judge most intriguing are those that probably would not view themselves as
villains at all. Instead, they seek to somehow complete or perfect themselves, but they use methods that are, at best, questionable.
I realize that Star
Trek: The Motion Picture (1979) and Star Trek V: The
Final Frontier (1989) are two relatively unpopular films in that
franchise. And yet I find the brand of villainy embodied in both pictures
rather compelling.
V'Ger set out to find
his Creator, and would let nothing stand in his way. It was a mission of
destruction, to be certain, but also one to establish identity...and
emotional connection. In this case, “villainy” is about filling a
void inside one’s self.
Similarly, Sybok in The
Final Frontier is a villain who has lets his beliefs impair his
judgment. He too seeks to find "God," but can't see through his
"arrogance and vanity" to realize he is engaged in a fool's
errand. When Sybok claims to “free minds” and “take away pain,”
I see not a man who considers himself a villain; but rather a savior.
In real life, these
types of saviors are often incredibly deluded and dangerous, and yet, indeed,
they are very dedicated or committed to a cause.
Another
villain I find endlessly intriguing is Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans) from the original Planet
of the Apes (1968). Chief Minister of Science and Defender
of the Faith, Dr. Zaius is an absolute zealot and censor. He mercilessly
applies his power against any who oppose his beliefs, from scientists such as
Cornelius to humans such as Taylor and Landon.
And yet, from his
perspective, no doubt, Zaius is absolutely correct to suppress certain
information regarding Ape history. Mankind did destroy
his world, rendering a paradise "a desert" in the process. And
ape-kind did rise from man's world, thus owing his very
culture to human-kind.
Again, these are highly
inconvenient facts if Ape City – and indeed, Ape Civilization itself ---
is to thrive and grow.
I find men (or simians…)
such as Zaius fascinating because, again, they don’t believe that they are
doing wrong. They don’t act out of evil, per se. Instead, they have
cast themselves as defenders or protectors of the status quo, and legitimately
feel that if the truth were to come out everything that they hold dear would be
threatened. Zaius actually believes that Taylor is “evil,” a
pestilence that must be wiped out if his culture is to survive.
Commander Reinhardt
(Maximillian Schell) in The Black Hole (1979) is
another villain who I like. He refused a direct order to bring
Cygnus home to Earth because he wants to explore the world beyond a black hole.
When this exploration is
threatened again by mutiny, he transforms his crew into the equivalent of
mindless zombies. It's an evil act, no doubt, but Reinhardt's ambition
“to know the truth” has no bounds. It absorbs his humanity the way the
black hole absorbs all light and energy.
And then there's that
weird moment in The Black Hole when Reinhardt confides
in the crew of the Palomino, and begs them to save them from his own sinister creation: Maximillian. This strange, almost throwaway line of dialogue suggests
Reinhardt may be a megalomaniac, but he remains, also, a vulnerable human being.
Reinhardt is a
variation, of course, on Captain Nemo, a Jules Verne villain I have always found myself attracted to. My favorite villain of all, Nemo is a man who is "done with society"
and bears allegiance to no country, no nation, and no ideology.
Instead, Captain Nemo creates his own world at the bottom of the sea: a world of knowledge and research and
science. I truly appreciate this idea of a man who has forsaken what he
views as the world's corruption and created a bubble around himself that
better suits his desires and needs.
I've been described, myself -- by one
of my best friends, no less -- as possessing a "complex
and contradictory personality as an outgoing and imaginative hermit/misanthrope
who has spent his entire adult life dedicated to the dissection of the stories,
characters and images found inside the frames of television sets and film
screens." So perhaps I have something in common with
Nemo, except that I construct my universe around and seek solace from film and television, not around the sea. Nemo goes wrong when he begins to sink ships and kill people, of course, but still...there's a nobility and purity about the man. Also, of course, excessive hubris...
In
terms of the horror genre, my preferences are a bit different. In short, I appreciate “monsters” or villains that genuinely frighten me.
Personally, I find Halloween’s Michael
Myers terrifying, at least in his original incarnation in 1978.
Michael's motives are opaque,
his visage is masked, and for long spells he is quiescent…merely watching
others, waiting to strike. Michael may resemble a human being in “shape,”
but he seems only a shell, emotionally and intellectually. He's either very
different from the rest of us, or very stunted.
As you all know, I watch
horror movies regularly and am rarely deeply bothered by them. But I have
experienced, over the years, recurring nightmares of Michael Myers. There
is something irrational – nay anti-rational about him.
That anti-sense comes
from the fact that he walks slowly and yet can still catch-up to you while you’re
running; from the fact that he has a sixth sense about any hiding place you
select; from the fact that no matter how many times you kill him, he always comes back to life. I have written about Myers a lot here on the blog, but I feel that
he is so effective a horror movie villain because his white mask is a blank slate, and we
can impose our own fears and psychological issues upon that slate. He is
the ultimate horror movie Rorschach test.
I don’t know if I have
answered your question clearly enough, but in general, I really enjoy watching
villains who are intelligent, boast a unique world view, and don’t consider
themselves villains in the first place. I would put HAL9000 in this
camp. I might even put Francis the Sandman in the same camp, as a dutiful
soldier doing his duty, but, in fact, working for the wrong side.
John, like you, I have always been a fan of the Captain Nemo character in the Walt Disney 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea. The production design of the Nautilus is simply an extremely believable 1800s design. The best friend of yours that has declared that you “…spent his entire adult life dedicated to…television sets and film screens” well, I would consider this a badge of honor and that you are like Nemo. Your home office is your Nautilus for you to command the journey of the written word in the domain of television & film. It is like in the opening credits to the late ‘80s anthology series Ray Bradbury Theater when Ray Bradbury would walk into his office. In the voice-over Bradbury stated the office inspired his writing by being surrounded by all of his collected items as your office must inspire you.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis of what makes a villain is interesting because they often range from misunderstood to the extreme evil incarnate like Halloween’s Michael Myers. I agree that Myers early on screen appearances are truly haunting often lingering in my nightmare thoughts. As we all know without these antagonist villains there would be little for the protagonist hero to do. I remember STARLOG published two books in the ‘70s one called Heroes and one Villains. Here is a link to the covers:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NzY4WDEwMjQ=/$(KGrHqZ,!j!E6+3z,sVNBPg8Dvk+)!~~60_35.JPG
SGB
A fantastic response to my question, John! I had a feeling that your choices would be more less-than-obvious and interesting picks, and you've certainly pointed out some fascinating villains. I, for one, am a huge sucker for ne'er-do-wells who openly acknowledge that they're evil and visibly relish it. I think those types of villains are more easily accessible to viewers and offer them an immediate, cathartic thrill.
ReplyDeleteYour choice of villain is an important one, though. The Snidely Whiplashes of the world may be good for kicks and giggles, but your examples offer up characters that are much truer to who we are as people. There are very few truly evil people in the world, like the villains I enjoy, whereas these characters here offer up a window into ourselves. They're not black-hearted, just misguided or driven. We can all relate to those feelings and, in certain contexts, we might end up being "the heavy" if a movie were to be made about our lives.
Great stuff, my friend!
I have often thought that the creature from 'Alien' was not actually evil. The facehugger, the chestburster, and other versions are naturally occurring biological functions, hence the term 'Alien'. Most specifically the Scott version, the creature seemed so primal.
ReplyDelete