Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2017 1:40:34 GMT
Dec 2, 2017 0:50:51 GMT @weirdraptor said:
Gruber is just another 2D villain who was played by an actor who made him seem like more.There's a reason why Hans Gruber is iconic and considered one of the best villains and why Kaecilius is considered a weak villain. That's polar opposites, therefore saying they are the same would automatically be wrong. If you can't see that then that's just your problem alone as everyone else can seem to see the reason why.
A character doesn't need to be deep or have an extensive backstory to be a good villain. Darth Vader in the original Star Wars did not have that and yet he also is an iconic villain and better than all of Marvel's.
Even The Terminator. He was a robot who didn't even have that many lines in the movie, played by an actor who isn't that great of an actor and yet he too is an iconic villain that is far better than any of Marvel's villains.
Do you even understand why that is even considered?
No, I understand. I understand better than you.Yes, because people appreciated what he was instead of whining about what he could be like modern audiences do. I'm not wrong and you're the one with a problem. The only reason you think Kaecilius is a weak villain is because he's an MCU villain. Make him the villain of a film outside of the series and you'd have nothing bad to say about him.
Oh, so now Hans doesn't need to be deep t be a good villain? Last time I checked, you were whining about Marvel's villains not being deep. Start being consistent and stop talking down to me like I'm an idiot. Seriously, where the hell do you get off?
I don't see any difference between Vader, the Terminator, and any of the Marvel villains.