A to Z Challenge – Y

Y

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 29 –  Y is for Yanquis

I chose the more stylized, Latin version in order to avoid any confusion with the New York Yankees (who also happen to be pure evil) and also to translate a more open version of the definition for villain archetypal definition. The Yanquis is a villain filled with the unshakable belief that what he’s doing is sanctioned by God and whatever governmental system he (or she) espouses. This person is often American (please…don’t stone me) but doesn’t have to be. He possesses an aloof confidence and stubborn attitude, as well as ill regard for cultures that are not his (or her) own. These villains loan themselves to Civil War stories, overseas conquest tales, pioneer adventures, and even war stories. It takes a lot for an American audience to embrace and appreciate a Yanquis villain, but they occupy a specific niche and thus, shall be mentioned as an Archetype.

This Bad Guy is less sympathetic, but more understandable. Most people reading this (and I apologize to my overseas fans…you can waggle your finger at me) live in Yanquis central. It’s why American tourists do not have the most sterling reputation in other countries. An ingrained belief that our way is better (Capitalism!) and yours is just cute. Yes this is a generalization, but to fully understand what makes a Yanquis a villain, you have to take these stereotypes and multiply them by a thousand. The embodiment of manifest destiny (literally and figuratively) the Yanquis pushes forward, conquering without thought for the effect he’s having. The cultures and environments he crushes beneath a (typically) iron boot don’t even cross his mind. What he’s doing is right, he (or she) knows it. Without a doubt. Its this blind faith and unshakable stubbornness that leads to a Yanquis rolling over or oppressing a people, and thus giving birth to the hero that must stop them.

What separates the Yanquis from some of the more diabolical archetypes is the lack of self-realization. Most of the time this antagonist has little to no idea what he’s doing, and how deleterious and affect he has on his surroundings. A very redeemable and relatable villain, the Yanquis is rarely an arch-villain, although there are occasions when the self-assuredness takes on a colder, darker hue. This manifests as cruelty, sadism, and genocide masquerading as a patriotic pride. This is when the Yanquis can become a truly despicable overarching antagonist, taking all the worst parts of capitalistic endeavor and twisting it into something evil and unforgivable. They typical Yanquis is employed by a much larger, greedier antagonistic force, and he/she will recognize the grievous wounds his fervor has left on his surroundings, leading to an anti-hero turn, or at the very least to undo some of the damage. A relatable villain that can sometimes make the audience painfully self-reflective, some of the most interesting baddies in fictive history are Yanquis, and deserve a place in the pantheon of villainy.

Some famous Yanquis villains:

  • Doc Durant (Hell on Wheels)
  • Cutler Beckett (Pirates of the Caribbean)
  • Governor Ratcliffe (Pocohontas)
  • Bloodbath McGrath (Wild Wild West…my apologies)
  • Major Fambrough (Dances With Wolves)
  • Dynamic Man (The Twelve)


Advertisements

A to Z Challenge – X

X

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 28 –  X is for Xenophile/Xenophobe

I roped these two together mostly because I wanted to show off having two choices for X (just kidding). The Xenophile and the Xenophobe are almost diametrically opposed, but they do have one thing in common: the unknown (or the barely known). The Xenophobe archetype has a distinct fear of the unknown, the different, the alien. In Sci-Fi novels, it’s quite often a literal fear of extraterrestrials that drives them to commit atrocities and evil deeds. In less outlandish fiction it manifests as a fear of less literal aliens, and is expressed through violence, repression, and in extreme examples genocide. The Xenophile is the polar opposite. This archetypal villain needs to know the unknowable, to the point where he’s willing to put everything and everyone at risk to get what he (or she) needs. Rather than irrational hate, this villain has an irrational attraction, again manifesting as literally “alien” in sci-fi, with a more grounded application in more grounded stories.

The Xenophobe can have many attributes and occupy many roles in the narrative. As a henchmen, he usually reports to an equally xenophobic master, who may or may not be using his cronies pre-disposition to garner wealth, power, or influence. As an arch-villain, the Xenophobe is a terrifying force. The brand of prejudice and unadulterated oppression they espouse germinates from a senseless fear that the audience sometimes struggles to understand. They can be powerful, or timid, smart or foolish, but they’re always influential, either inherently or through their position. They attract followers that feel the same senseless dark emotions that they do. The Xenophobic villains are always scary, even if their fears are sometimes well-founded (only in the Sci-Fi case…and rarely). The lengths they go to express their fear are horrifying to any rational mind, and that’s what makes them such terrifying villains.

The Xenophile tends to play a much different role. Often, this archetype can start as protagonistic force, or at least an ally for the hero. Then, as the story progresses, their curiosity and fascination with the alien and unknown gets the best of them.  They start to become reckless. What started as a healthy curiosity becomes a dark obsession, and the Xenophile is willing to do anything (and everything) for more knowledge, or to help their new-found “friends”. This example places the Xenophile they as a henchman, usually reporting to an alien antagonist intent on world domination, etc. In the rare occasion a Xenophile is employed as the arch-villain, their true machinations are disguised behind a veneer of altruism or scientific discovery. No matter what role they play, a Xenophile often meets a rather fitting end. They are often destroyed by the very alien influences that piqued their interest in the first place.

Some Famous Xenophobes and Xenophiles:

  • Hans Landa (Inglorious Basterds)
  • Ronan the Accuser (Marvel)
  • Amon (Legend of Korra)
  • Voldemort (and his Death Eaters)
  • Ash (Alien)
  • Dr. William Weir (Event Horizon)

A to Z Challenge – W

W

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 27 –  W is for Widow/Widower

This particular tragic villain archetype is a little but different from the others in so far as it can easily be applied to a hero, side-character, etc. equally as well as an antagonist. The key to understanding and employing a good Widow/Widower villain is aligning their motivations with their back story. Everyone’s favorite widow is of course the Black Widow, but she wouldn’t fit this archetype even if she were a villain (which on occasion, she is in the comic books). I’m also not using this archetype to describe the more esoteric “Black Widow” that seduces and kills men for money, thrills, etc. That’s more of a description than an archetype. A Widow or a Widower villain archetype is pushed to commit dastardly deeds and evil acts either out of grief, revenge, or in service to a lost or dying loved one, usually a wife or husband but not necessarily. Motivated by extreme loss, these bad guys are some of the most sympathetic yet the most desperate, driven to extreme examples of villainy by sadness and regret.

Even though they may be sympathetic, this archetype is rarely redeemable. Keenly aware that they’re choices are wrong, they nonetheless make them, because they feel like they have to. On some occasions they’ll be turned, or offered a more productive alternative by the protagonists, but usually they ride their dark decisions into oblivion, never really achieving the revenge, justification, or results they desired. This is problematic for the audience in some cases, as we see that the heinous acts this villain perpetrates are deplorable, yet we understand the desperation and emotional turmoil that drove them to it. When employed properly, a Widow/Widower archetype is a complicated but emotionally interesting antagonist in any story.

While compelling as an arch-villain, a Widow/Widower is also occasionally employed as a trusted henchmen or even an “indentured” contributor to an arch-villains maniacal plans. A Big Baddie might bait them with an offer of curing, returning, or offering revenge for their loss, holding sway over the unfortunate, grief-stricken man (or woman) and employing their skills or expertise to further their destructive plots. A Widow/Widower archetype can have all sorts of attributes, ranging from extreme intelligence to powerful physical skills. They’re relatable, sympathetic, and occasionally enjoyable characters that still commit unspeakable, irredeemable for what they deem as a good cause.

Famous Widow and Widower villains:

  • Mr. Freeze (DC)
  • Mrs. Coulter (His Dark Materials)
  • Darth Vader (Star Wars)
  • Davy Jones (Pirates of the Caribbean)
  • Tywin Lannister (Kind of; Game of Thrones)
  • Alistair Mechanus (Heart of Steel)

A to Z Challenge – V

V

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 25 –  V is for Varmints

What is a Varmint, you ask? Well clearly its a slang insult used by Yosemite Sam when he’s upset and flailing the six-shooters. What I found out after I looked it up, is it also means “an irritating or obnoxious person” (Thanks Webster) which is a facet of villainy I haven’t covered yet. For the Varmint archetype, we’ll be discussing the truly insufferable, irritating, obsequious little bastards that annoy the audience in every way possible. These are the bad guys that you absolutely cannot stand, and borderline give you a stress headache every time they’re on-screen. They’re the boot-lickers, butt-kissers, and apple-polishers of the villainous world. They flatter, lie, connive, and mince their way to approval from a much more influential being (whether its a more powerful antagonist or an unwitting protagonistic force). This isn’t a character the audience loves to hate, or even moderately respects. A Varmint is universally unlikable, and that’s the true genius of employing the character as a villain.

When it comes to redemption, a Varmint walks a slippery slope. They’ll gladly turn their coat as soon as it looks like their side is losing, but rarely is this due to a desire to redeem themselves or an inner epiphany. Most of the time, this Varmint just wants to save the skin that oft-turned coat is protecting. There are rare occasions where this despicable n’er-do-well will genuinely see the error of his ways, and try to make up for a lifetime (or at least most of a storyline) with a final, and often fatal, act of bravery. The flip-flop nature of the Varmint makes them one of the hardest archetypes to hold down, and some memorable examples will change allegiances multiple times in a story. More often than not, however, this uncouth, undependable little bastard will wind up going down with the proverbial ship he jumped to, meeting a fitting end and satisfying the audience completely.

A Varmint is also often comedic, and can be used to lighten up a somewhat dark facet of the narrative. Some of the coolest examples bungle along and the audience enjoys mocking their ineptitude until they do something truly deplorable to a hero or heroine. We’ll often forget the fully evil nature of the Varmint until it smacks us in the face. The most fitting role for this archetype is a right-hand man or trusted henchmen to an arch-villain or over-arching antagonistic force. They’ll execute prat falls, fail spectacularly at simple jobs, and then lie or blame someone else so they don’t get punished for their ineptitude. A Varmint will do and say just about anything to please whoever it is they serve. On very, very rare occasions, a Varmint may be the main arch-villain, but often these are farces or comedies, as previously mentioned. Rarely exceptionally smart, strong, skilled, or powerful, this archetype nonetheless features a naive cunning often born of desperation and fear. They can be exceptionally memorable and effective villains, and often are attributed with some of the most quotable lines or memorable moments.

Some Famous Varmints:

  • Peter “Wormtail” Pettigrew (Harry Potter)
  • Benny (The Mummy)
  • The Sheriff of Rottinghan (Men in Tights)
  • Jar Jar Binks (Not a villain, but he should be)
  • Klytus (Flash Gordon)

A to Z Challenge – U

U

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 24 –  U is for Übermensch

Originally derived from Nietzsche in Thus Spake Zarathustra, the Ubermensch (I’m not doing the damn umlaut every time, people. Get over it) was essentially a reference to “Overhuman” or more colloquially, Superman. Ol’ Friedrich used the term as more of a social commentary about someone transcending morality.  For the purposes of villain archetypes, the Ubermensch (to me) is a villian, arch or otherwise, possessing abilities, powers, or preternatural skills above and beyond that of normal men. These bad guys are not just smart or strong or fast, they are inhumanly powerful, supernaturally intelligent, and indescribably agile. The strongest human might be able to lift a car. An Ubermensch can lift two and throw them into low orbit (if it were physically possible, but I digress). The fastest man can run four minute mile. This antagonist can run one in .4 seconds. Yes, these particular villains often lend themselves to comic books, and that’s where the majority of them reside. Some supernatural or scientifically modified characters fit this bill too, and the graphic medium is not the only place we find examples of the Ubermensch.

A very old conundrum that comic book geeks are very familiar with (and is kind of illustrated in Superman II) is: if regular men and women could suddenly do extraordinary things, whats to stop them from breaking laws and violating social norms? The Ubermensch is the prime example of what happens when such inconceivably powerful men (and women) no longer feel constrained by the society that spawned them. They don’t have to obey laws, because they can’t apply to someone that’s no longer fettered by human limitations. Many times that is the motivation for an Ubermensch arch-villain. They commit deplorable and heinous acts because…who’s going to stop them? These archetypes are also sometimes employed as trusted servants or henchmen, though these examples are often more brawn then brains. Surprisingly, an Ubermensch can be very redeemable, as they’re often made to see the consequences of the horrible atrocities they commit. This will tend to drive them wither further into homicidal madness, or make them repentant enough to use their powers to right the wrongs they’ve committed, often with one fatalistic gesture that leaves the audience feeling sympathetic for the inhuman villain they’ve hated the course of the story.

The key to writing/creating a good Superman, whether its a villain or a hero, is to focus on what makes them human, not what doesn’t. Many creators (at least the good ones) choose to play up the flaws and foibles of their Ubermensch villains, which often lead to their downfall. If you choose to make an invulnerable antagonist, make sure he’s greedy or fragile in another fashion. Perfectly unbeatable villains are as bad as perfectly flawless heroes. It makes the story feel less realistic, and if you’re employing an Ubermensch into any facet of your story, you’re going to need all the believability you can hold on to.

Some famous Ubermensch Villains (Not all comic books…but mostly)

  • Loki (Avengers)
  • Magneto (Marvel)
  • Black Adam (DC)
  • Khan Noonien Singh (Star Wars)
  • Magnus the Red (Warhammer 40K, though just about any of the Primarchs fit)
  • Dr. Fu Manchu

A to Z Challenge – T (part two, concerning dinosaurs)

T

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 23 – T is for Tyrannosaurs Rex *Special Edition*

So I did Tyrant for T, and it got me thinking about dinosaurs. Also the new Jurassic Park with talking Raptors and genetically engineered uber-killing apex predators “designed to be bigger than the T-Rex” (Oh Dr. Wu, how could you?) had me thinking about dinosaurs as well. And the question I have to ask is: When was the Tyrannosaurus Rex not enough? The T-Rex is my favorite dinosaur of all time, and one of my favorite bad guys (sort of, it does take out the Raptors and the slimy corporate fat cat, which are way worse). I applaud the Jurassic Park folks for employing it in two of the four movies made about it. And it’s also in just about every dinosaur movie, book, comic book, and television show.

But with the upcoming Chris Pratt-injected super-sequel, I can’t help but ask: when did the Tyrannosaurus become not enough? In JP’s one and two, he’s (and she’s) a feature villain, and even makes an anti-hero turn at the end of both. Why the hell did we have to break out the Spinosaurus for number three? T-Rex not big and scary enough? And now in number four we’re genetically creating an ultra-crazy, gives-no-fucks, not-real dinosaur? No Hollywood, no. If the Tyrannosaur was good enough for Steven Spielberg, it’s good enough for the rest of you.

So when we all shell out 10-15 dollars for all the summer blockbusters (Avengers first, then the rest), if part of your paycheck is going to watch Jurassic World, think of the T-Rex. He’s the reliable old antagonistic primal force that scared the living bejesus out of every kid (and their parents) with a cup of water and some clever bass play. No matter what Hollywood tries to do to one-up the poor old guy, he’ll always be the best. Vampires have Dracula. Robots have the T-1000. Comic book villains have the Joker. Dinosaurs have the T-Rex. Don’t forget him this summer, people. Don’t you dare.

Signing Off.

A to Z Challenge – T

T

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 23 – T is for Tyrant

The Tyrant archetype can find its way into any genre of fiction, from a space-faring Sci-Fi Lord, to the whimsically corrupt wood-King in Fantasy, to the sand-swept deserts and lush jungles of the modern day. Webster defines a Tyrant as “a sovereign or other ruler who uses power oppressively or unjustly” and lord knows that calls to mind a cornucopia of fictional arch-villains. What makes a Tyrant differ from a Royal archetype, though the two are very similar, lies in the source of the power and the motivation for the abuse. Many Royals are also Tyrants, but Tyrants, more often than not, aren’t royal. They’ve usually earned their positions through blood, sweat, and tears (and typically all spilled by someone else) and are in no hurry to be removed from their lofty perches. They wield power like a cudgel, striking down any and all opposition to their rule, and typically oppressing the common men and women, creating a furtive spawning ground for protagonists to rise against them.

A Tyrant is typically powerful, ambitious, and cruel. They’re not necessarily possessing any vast intellect, but are usually cunning enough to strike down any moves made against them. While not always physically strong or imposing,  most Tyrants villains have an aura about them that exudes influence. A harem of henchmen are at their beckon call, often hell-bent on becoming Tyrants in their own right, and employing the same cruel methods to serve the arch-protagonist. While these henchmen might be redeemable at some point in the story, the Tyrant never makes an anti-hero turn. He’s too cruel, too unrepentant, and too unsympathetic for the audience to feel sorry for. He’s uncaring and callous until he meets his end, often in a messy (and all too appropriate) fashion.

We love to hate the Tyrants almost as much as Royals, yet they tend to be scarier because they’re more identifiable. Many Tyrants earn their positions (although not in any kind of good manner) and start from humble beginnings, unlike their Royal counterparts. The utterly callous way they treat the people beneath them seems colder and more frightening when we consider that the Tyrant may have once been among those people. A Tyrant also tends to have an end to his means (ha), typically lovely goals like genocide, conquest, or exploitation. The end-game for this twisted sovereign may be completely understandable, or could simply be born of childhood prejudices or racial hatred. All the audience knows is they hate the Tyrant, might be a bit creeped out by him (or her), and can’t wait for the moment when the hero finally treats them to their just deserts.

Some famous (fictional) Tyrants:

  • The Lord Marshal (Chronicles of Riddick)
  • Adam Susan (V for Vendetta)
  • Gul Dukat (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine)
  • The Governor (Walking Dead)
  • Emperor Palpatine and Grand Moff Tarkin (Star Wars)
  • Doctor Doom (Marvel)
  • Richard III

A to Z Challenge – S

S

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 22 – S is for Serial Killer

This archetype…is kind of a slam dunk. Serial killers are one of the most oft-used arch-villains, and easily one of the most compelling. Leaving a trail of bodies for a hard-boiled (or well-endowed) detective or amateur sleuth to follow makes for some enrapturing entertainment. They’ve played the main bad guy (and sometimes the good guy) in countless TV shows, movies, comic books and prose work. The Serial Killers penchant for trying to outsmart the protagonists, or the forces trying to catch them, makes plot twists, loops, and dives very accessible to the creator. A dark imagination can run wild, and create all manner of creepy and grotesque scenarios that can’t help  but pull the curious audience in.

A very popular movement in the last few years is to feature a serial killer a anti-hero from the get-go (i.e. Dexter, to a lesser extent Frailty and Silence of the Lambs). As arch-villains they are almost never redeemable, corrupt to the core and fully devoid of any remorse. When not the main villain, however, these murderers can often have their homicidal intents turned on more deserving prey, in a killer-killing-killers scenario, which is also the basis for any anti-hero fiction with a Serial Killer as a protagonist. They differ from the Psychopath, although they could be accurately classified as one, in that they specifically have to kill people to satisfy their compulsion. It does tend to pigeon-hole this archetype into the cops and robbers (or killers) genre, but their employment is so wide-spread that they deserve their own arhcetype.

The examples of Serial Killers are as varied of the methods they use. They’re usually intelligent, cold, calculating, but occasionally can be prone to violent outbursts and fits of rage. The application of their intelligence can vary as well, some being master manipulators, others devious strategists, and some rare examples a twisted kind of savant. They can be successful, middle class, or completely destitute. They have varied ethnic backgrounds, can be either sex, any sexual orientation (often this is confused and complicated, which can lead to the killing compulsion), and as previously mentioned they employ a variety of methods in their “work”. The chilling real-life examples often influence these memorable antagonists, and help shape some of the creepiest villains in all of fiction.

Some Famous Serial Killers:

  • Paul Spector (The Fall)
  • Buffalo Bill (Silence of the Lambs)
  • John Doe (Seven)
  • Macbeth (Think about it…you know it’s true)
  • Patrick Bateman (American Psycho)
  • Anton Chigurh (No Country for Old Men)

A to Z Challenge – R

R

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 21 – R is for Royal

Royal archetype villains are rife throughout both visual and printed media. Taking the historically oppressive machinations of monarchies, as well as the hereditary nature of the bloodlines is an ideal breeding ground for the kid of oppression and corruption that creates compelling stories. Often more cruel than political, Royalty are often cruel for the sake of being cruel because their positions allow it. The romantic ideal of the peasantry rising above the monarchs is prevalent in history and historical fiction alike, and can often create some very entertaining villains.

The Royal arch-villain…he or she is always rich, connected, and has a bevy of henchmen, mercenaries, and the like at his/her beckon call. On occasion a Royal villain is employed by a higher, more malevolent evil, often because they owe their position to the aforementioned arch-villain. At some point the Royal became corrupted, or possibly they were born (or in-born) that way. Completely unsympathetic and devoid of any care for those beneath them, they often oppress on a large scale and have little to no awareness for the protagonists until they finally become a nuisance. On a rare occasion, a Royal villain may be redeemable, often when wooed or convinced to help the heroes against a greater evil. More often than not, however, these bad guys are just evil, and eventually come to a rather violent and sticky end. And the audience is okay with that.

A historically typical 1% vs. the other 99% story will often feature a Royal villain of some sort. They oppress the people, a hero rises to fight back, roll credits, cash checks. Even though we know how the story will go, it still breeds some excellent villainy. The 99% of us that are borderline genetically pre-disposed to hate Royalty, and their complete and utter disregard for any of the relateable characters. They’re callous, pampered, and terribly pale, mostly. Many of the most memorable happen to British or European, but Royal villains are not exclusively European. Nothing can get an audience against your antagonist faster than making him the member of a Royal family, Pasty or not, the audience can’t stand these types, and while many are at the very least historically inspired, the memorable Royal villains are some of the worst in fiction.

Famous Royal villains:

  • Richard III
  • Marquise de Merteuil (Les Liaisons Dangereuses)
  • Prince John (Robin Hood)
  • King Edward (Braveheart)
  • The Step-Mom (Snow White)
  • Baron Zemo (Marvel)

A to Z Challenge – Q

Q

My theme for the A to Z challenge is Villain Archetypes.

Yes, 26 descriptions of some of your favorite villains of literature, TV, and movies.

April 20 – Q is for “Q-Ball” *Special Edition

Yes, I know its properly “Cue” ball, but just let me ramble here. After finishing Marvel’s new Netflix series Daredevil, featuring the bald-headed baddie Kingpin aka Wilson Fisk, and it got me and the SO thinking…why are there so many bald bad guys? Being folically challenged myself, I tend to gravitate towards any bald characters that I can root for. Riddick is one of my favorites. Any Jason Statham character can count me in their fandom. Even when the gals go full bore and shave their heads (Evee from V, or Nebula from Guardians). But when it comes to evil, the shaven-headed options are endless. Therefore, today I give you the “Q-Ball” archetype, the Bald Guy.

A bald antagonist can fill many different roles. Throw in a beard, and you’ve got the definition of untrustworthy and villainous (and also my portrait). They’ve been everything from the most trusted henchmen, to a disposable flunky, all the way up to the top of the food chain as the main antagonist of a multi-volume series.A bare scalp doesn’t contribute to their villainy,  but it definitely helps visually create a visage of evil. They can be wise, foolish, strong, scrawny, irredeemable, or sympathetic. Plenty of baldies have become anti-heroes, and some of the most memorable ones at that. But the question I’ll posit in this post is why? Why are all the bald guys bad?

I believe it lies in the silhouette. We imagine a hero or heroine with gorgeous locks of hair that he or she has to flip out of a perfectly sculpted face. A hairless head implies an imperfection, but also an acknowledgement, awareness, and even embracing the imperfection. There’s something skull-like about the shaven pate that instinctively raises the hackles of any human being. Perhaps its the attention to detail, or the implication of penance due to the semi-religious history of a bald head (used to be called a tonsure worn by monks, etc.). No matter why, bald villains are some of the most memorable in all of fiction, both print and visual. I’m proud to be a member of the brotherhood, villainous or not, and I’ll keep secretly rooting for the folically challenged evil doers until I’m dead in the ground.

Some Famous Bald Villains:

  • Lex Luthor (DC)
  • Bane (DC)
  • Kingpin (Marvel)
  • Imhotep (The Mummy)
  • The Kurgan (Highlander)
  • Ming the Merciless (Flash Gordon)
  • Voldemort (Harry Potter)
  • Kurtz (Heart of Darkness/Apocalyspe Now)