Is he the most iconic/influential villain of all time?

Is he the most iconic/influential villain of all time?

Other urls found in this thread:

m.ign.com/articles/top-25-spider-man-villains
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>Spider Man villains
>iconic or influential

Pick one.

Batfag get out

Yes, definitely. 100% forever. Affirmative.

> >Spider Man villains
> >iconic or influential

What did he mean by this?

If that were so, how come his movie incarnations suck? I actually love Dafoe but we could do better, especially costume wise

m.ign.com/articles/top-25-spider-man-villains
>Spider-Man has a wide variety of villains, one of the most iconic and well-balanced in comics.

Get fucked Sup Forums

I know Goblin was 100% dick to Spider-Man and Peter Parker and went so far as to kill someone he loved. But even then I still feel like Otto is his official arch-nemesis, not sure why.

I know Goblin was insane and most of Peter's villains are just thugs looking for a quick buck, but what in the hell was Otto's endgame again? Sure hes part of the I HATE SPIDER MAN! fan club but damn if I can think of his motivation outside of that. Was it just science?

He's not even top 5

I'd give that to the Joker

I've never understood the argument for Spider-man's villains. They're far from iconic; in fact they're almost all literally who's.

>Is he the most iconic/influential villain of all time?

He's a literal Joker ripoff so no.

>literally who's

Just for using that term, you're basically a flaming homosexual

Growing up in the 90's Doc Ock and Hobgoblin were definitely the pushed Spider-Man foes.

Uhh- not really. They're fundamentally different.
The Green Goblin would probably view the Joker as a spastic retard. And the Joker would probably view the Green Goblin as a bipolar stiff.

I guess corrupt scientist is plenty. Wasn't his firsts cheme to just steal money?

Whelp, gonna go read me some classic Spidey now.

Solid argument.

>thinks Green Goblin is a Joker rip-off

Flaming homosexual and also literal philistine

I recall something about the disabled. He really is the basic evil scientist

Yeah as a kid, Otto, Hobgoblin and Venom were the only big Spiderman villains.

Holy shiy, I just remembered when the Jackal came back as a literal Joker rip-off during the clone saga

Can somebody explain to me why Spiderfags overcompensate so hard?

I mentally blocked out Venom but yea definitely Venom too.

The nigga even got equal billing and playtime on a video game

THAT'S the one . . .

>Using IGN as a source

Because Batfags are frighteningly numerous
Or, if not numerous, frighteningly voracious
It's honestly a bit weird

>using a Red Robin reaction image

Shut the fuck up Batfag

I think Spidey has great villains but that user is right IGN as a source is fucking bullshit

Seriously nigger? Ditko's one if the most influential artists in Capes, that alobe makes his early villains iconic

you right, you right

He's been the "Evil Corporatist", the out-of-control "Mad Scientist" the opportunistic Con-Artist and the power-hungry Authoritarian.

Lex Luthor has evolved over generations, each time representing the bogeyman of the era, the iconic nemesis of the noblest, purest champion of Humanity.

There's a reason he's been in 6 of 7 movies. And will certainly be Superman's foil in the future as well.

I'm a Marvelfag, and I have to give it Lex Luthor. No one over the age of 25 thinks it's the fucking Joker.

>No one over the age of 25 thinks it's the fucking Joker.

MY
NIGGA

Nah, in the grand scheme of things GG has had a bigger impact on Spider-Man's life. Even with Superior Spider-Man brainswapping things Norman did decades ago still have an effect when brought up to Peter.

And the Green Goblin is LITERALLY Spider-Man's Joker. With super-goblin powers (?) simply because Spider-Man can throw cars.

That's a nonsense argument. Green Goblin just flat out isn't culturally relevant

>With super-goblin powers (?) simply because Spider-Man can throw cars.
Nigga, please start going to school more consistently, this grammar is reprehensible
Anyway
Explain to me how the Green Goblin is 'literally' Spider-Man's Joker.
If anything, he's more like Two-Face if both personalities were evil.

You guys should get out more. It's undoubtedly Joker.

>There's a reason he's been in 6 of 7 movies

Because people in Hollywood are stupid causals, and think Zod and Lex are the only viable villains Superman has.

Lex is classic, but Joker is more iconic to more people. There've been so many interpretations of the same classic core of the character.

When you ask someone to name a superhero/villain combo it's always going to be Batman/Joker. It's etched into cultural consciousness at this point in a way Spuerman/Lex is not.

Remember that time that The Joker led the greatest assemblage of Villains in the DC Universe? Me neither.

He's Batman's arch-villain only when Batman is written in "Damaged little 8 yr old boy" mode and not throat-punching Darkseid and taking down entire teams of his rogues.

Lex Motherfucking Luthor.

Not that user, but no he's definetely a combination of the theatricality and madness of Joker and the genius and ruthless corruption of Lex. GG's obsession with Spider-Man is Joker to Batman tier. If anything GG is the Joker aspect and Norman when sane is the Lex.

The villain normies recognize most =/= most influential.
Joker is one-note and his motivations change with the winds. The New 52 Joker literally had his entire motive copy/pasted straight from another villain, word for word.
He's good for Hot Topic and merchandise, but in the end, no one will ever like HIM.

Just because Luthor is written as being better at organizing/working with others doesn't mean he's a more iconic villain.

>Explain to me how the Green Goblin is 'literally' Spider-Man's Joker.

Literally, these two niggers have the same face pasted on, and you still can't grasp this.

They are the same explosive-wielding, bomb-planting, loved-one assassinating randumb crazy asshole psychopath.

>"Oh but Osborne has a business"
I do not give a single fuck. They are as close as they can be without causing copyright butthurt.

>The villain normies recognize most
Yes that means he is the most iconic.

I think post-TDK a lot of people have had the same mindset as you do after all the edgy kids started wearing Why So Serious shirts and shit. And that's fine to be annoyed by the new wave Joker fans. But Joker's been a classic villain for a long fucking time and was a cultural icon back during the Adam West series the Burton movie and TAS.

>Joker is one-note
>his motivations change with the winds
Those are contradictory statements. Besides you could definitely say the same about Lex. It's not like his character arc has really been that dynamic over the years. He was president for a while and now he's a superhero. And in-between he has a hateboner for superheroes and does evil shit.

Joker is definitely the most iconic comic book villain of all time, and you'd have to be a pro at mental gymnastics to deny otherwise.

>Those are contradictory statements.
No, the motivation of "I do it for lulz" is pretty consistent and one-note.

The Joker is not this multi-dimensional guy, he's this crazy person who commits crime because Fuck Batman and Fuck Society as a Whole.

The difference is that Green Goblin actually has, you know, real reasons to hate Spider-Man, and isn't just some weird empty slot that the writer can just insert whatever random ideology they want to shove in there in an attempt to look 'deep'.
And the whole multiple-personality thing?
Like I said, Two-Face.

>I do not give a single fuck
Nigga, quit eating raw sugar so late at night
It's not good for you

Okay people, let's organize this a little:
What are the criteria that make a great villain?
And of those qualities, who has all of them to the greatest extent?
Yeah, the Joker is more evil than Lex Luthor, but Lex has more villainous team-up masterminding abilities.
What's more important? What about the ability to make good villain's dialog?
What about raw superpower?
Are we really giving more weight to "evil genius" than to "indestructible unstoppable monster"?
How much import should we give their relatability, how much we can understand their motives?

>Young Bryan Cranston will never play Norman/GG

feels bad, man

...

>his motivations change with the winds
>No, the motivation of "I do it for lulz" is pretty consistent and one-note.

Which is it user?

>A character that has been depicted as multi-faceted in numerous iconic stories by different writers over decades is shallow because I say he is

lel okay man

Green Goblin was never #1 until they brought Norman back at the end of the Clone Saga. After being retroactively responsible for that he's been the biggest bad. Before that, it was always Doc Ock, even in the Ditko era.

>The difference is that Green Goblin actually has, you know, real reasons to hate Spider-Man

Go on.

>indestructible
>unstoppable
These are both highly relative terms, especially in comic books.
Especially since every villain is stopped, usually in a very short narrative.

>I've never understood the argument for Spider-man's villains. They're far from iconic; in fact they're almost all literally who's.

aside from Lex Luthor, the Joker, and maybe Magneto, pretty much all supervillains are literally whos to non-comics fans.

Carnage was the original Spider-villain Joker ripoff tho.

Different user.
Anyway, to clarify
He's one-note in that he's always some clown bastard who's going to kill a lot of people and, God, it's gonna be so funny, you know?
The reasons why he does so are tremendously inconsistent. And, at times, sort of contradictory.
He kind of reads like a tumblr baby's first edgy supervillain, especially in recent years.

I'm going to be honest: I never really got Doctor Octopus' appeal. I mean he is in a lot of ways the anti-Peter Parker spurned nerd supergenius. And he has four metal tentacles. But that's kind of it. I definitely accept him as one of Spidey's top 3 villains (GG, Ock, Venom) but he doesn't really resonate with me like the other two. Does anyone else get where I'm coming from?

>inconsistent origin stories make a character iconic.
I guess Luthor would be DEEPer if he was a Luthor virus or an amnesiac shoe salesman who had One Bad Day.

That makes you the opposite of iconic, it make you Inconsistent.

Nah, I feel you. I think it's because Venom and Green Goblin are so closely related to Spider-Man/Peter Parker directly. Ock is kinda just there.

>Green Goblin actually has, you know, real reasons to hate Spider-Man

lolno. when they first met, Green Goblin tricked Spider-Man into filming a movie in which the villains trying to kill him were actually real in order to build his own rep as a crimelord.

Ock has literally fucked his surrogate Mom.
Married her, even.

>He's one-note in that he's always some clown bastard who's going to kill a lot of people and, God, it's gonna be so funny, you know?

Yeah but you could break down any super villain like that.

>Lex Luthor is just some corporate bastard who's going to kill Superman, and God, he's going to prove he's superior

>Norman Osborn is just some Goblin bastard who's going to kill Spider-Man, and God, it's going to be so funny

Carnage is Joker with all the theatricality drained out of him. He's all about spreading chaos and violence with none of the whimsy or tact.
He's iconic in the sense that he can be reimagined in numerous ways and given different backgrounds and they all work because at the end of the day he's still Joker and they don't compromise who he is post-transformation.

>he's this crazy person who commits crime because Fuck Batman

he wishes.

This man is correct

>Carnage is Joker with all the theatricality drained out of him. He's all about spreading chaos and violence with none of the whimsy or tact.

so basically he's the current Joker.

>end of the day he's still Joker and they don't compromise who he is post-transformation.

So he's just a costume stabbing people.

MY NIGGA
>darkseid, what IS a tiger-force, tho?

Nah, Luthor is already that deep. His family has been cited as a source of motivation that eventually gave rise to villainy, despite that everybody falls into limbo every five years. Member when he had a daughter?

That's always been too ridiculous to take seriously.

Not the same as a dude fucking your gf and throwing her off a bridge. Or cloning you and making you question your very identity.

Also random question but does anyone know where Peter Parker's first reaction to Norman being put into power post-Secret Invasion was? As in what series. I want to say it was New Avengers, but it'd make more sense to be in ASM.

>describes their first encounter
>"lol is this what you call a reason to hate someone?"

boi, you got some long-ass arms for all that reachin' you do

That other guy didn't say anything about origin stories, though.

>Green Goblin
>killing Spider-Man to be funny
You're not very observant, are you?

Green Goblin's only real reason to hate Spider-Man is that he almost always loses to him. The actual complexity to their enmity is almost entirely on Peter's side.

>Norman Osborn is just some Goblin bastard who's going to kill Spider-Man, and God, it's going to be so funny
Reading that I instantly thought of this

Is current Carnage even that much edgier than current Joker? I feel like he ended up lagging behind.

>Also random question but does anyone know where Peter Parker's first reaction to Norman being put into power post-Secret Invasion was? As in what series. I want to say it was New Avengers, but it'd make more sense to be in ASM.

Marvel continuity is too scattered for there to be a definitive "first" reaction. Especially with Bendis in charge.

I think even though current Joker isn't as whimsical he still is theatrical and pulls off larger than life stunts. I mean people shit on it, but the Joker arcs of Snyder's run definitely had him doing theatrical fucked up shit to mess with Batman.

Nah, he just goes more into the philosophy of chaos and creating violence as almost an artform. Joker is more about getting "laughs" or getting to the punchline or his weird relationship with Batman. The violence and chaos are byproducts of expressing his madness versus Carnage is more violence for violence's sake.

Are you denying that Osborn takes joy in fucking with Peter?

There had to be one issue that showed his initial reaction though.

He believes Spider-Man/Peter Parker is out to ruin his life in general.
He pesters the Green Goblin as Spider-Man, and ostensibly ruins his son's life as Peter Parker (Peter 'stole' the love of Harry's life, Harry was never a drug addict before hanging out with Peter and his friends, etc).
Combine that with the shaky sanity and paranoia and you got yourself a recipe for an archenemy

Yeah, but it's not funny.
It's /therapeutic/.

He has a love-hate relationship for sure. But sometimes I wonder if it's more him hating Spider-
Man or hating Peter.

No. If you're talking just comics it's easily the Joker

Its funny to him.

When faggots like yourself need things to be relevant outside of comics to be considered "influential" despite them being influential within the genre THAT is a nonsense argument

>Lex Luthor is just some corporate bastard who's going to kill Superman
He's the world's greatest mind, who believes that the Space Man is undermining his rightful place at the apex of human society.
He's the futurist who believes that Humanity's destiny is being subverted by an over-reliance on an Angel from on High who saves them from anything.
He's the boiling pot of arrogance who subverts his own accomplishments because of his personal resentment of Superman.

Lex Luthor has a level of complexity as a character that "What was my origin/motivation today" Joker can't hope to match.

Modern Joker is recognizeable, and he's relate-able to angsty young people angry at society. He's a complete split from the character from the 80's or further back.\

Yes, the Joker is pretty iconic overall. He's not THE most iconic villain in any way.
The only thing truly iconic in Spider-Man is Spider-Man, who's massively iconic. Aunt May is roughly as iconic as Green fucking Goblin.

>He's not THE most iconic villain in any way.

Good lord, man.

It's strongly undercut by Norman not knowing Peter's identity anymore, though. Finding out about Peter being Spider-Man was the moment that their rivalry became personal, and Peter's friendship with Harry has zero significance to Norman without it.

>supervillains who kill people are edgy

wow great observation, user. really makes you think

The one with the most merch and greatest market penetration.

Memories are incidental.
Feelings are forever.
Especially when you're fuckin insane

Venom is pretty iconic now. Or at least the idea and image of Venom/the symbiote.

I never liked him. As a nutty 60's villain he had the lamest gimmick and his 'evil genius' thing he's had going on since the 90's or so is terrible and totally mismatches the wacky Goblin design.

80's Hobgoblin (Ned Leeds before retconmania) was the only good Goblin.

>Good lord, man.
OP didn't ask "what are iconic villains", he asked "who is the MOST iconic villain of all time"
It's not the Joker except for Batfags.