Doing A Competent Villain Right

What makes a good hero is a good villain. And sometimes that is true. But the definition of a good villain in my book is a competent villain. Not a villain who loses to said hero day in and day out because a hero winning nonstop with little to no difficulty is just boring IMO.

I want to clarify there is a biiig difference between a competent villain and a villain sue. For instance. Villain sues.

The only way they're in such a high position is because the heroes are written as incompetent idiots. I don't care what the haters think of these guys but IMO there was potential from these two. I think they could have made good villains in the hands of the right writer. But when you have a writer that is so in-love with these villains you'd see the way the writer expresses his love for them. I honestly believe Malcolm could have been a good villain and I'm not so blind with my hatred towards him to see he could have been a good villain. Same with The Light but by God were there alot of misfires. ALOT.

They're the definition of competent villains. And the definition of a complex villain but at the end of the day is still a villain. Mainly because these two have a goal and is more than willing to do amoral things to make sure their goal is achieved but what brings the complexity of the two out is they have some human characteristics as-well. They're also not afraid of having losses but they learn from their losses. Even Doctor Doom loose on occasion but he takes his loss and improves on them.

A competent villain can be done but be careful by not mistaking competency to villain sue.