1.2k voters

14 Evil Fan Theories About DC Villains That Made Us Say "Woah"

Updated April 26, 2021 4.2k votes 1.2k voters 160.5k views14 items

List Rulesvote up the fan theories about DC Villains that make the most sense

Like the MCU, there have been countless iterations of villains living amongst the multiverse of the DCEU, ranging from comics, animated shows to movies. Many of them have been unforgettable and terrifying performances, yet somehow fans keep finding the deeper meaning behind their motives. Here are 14 wild fan theories about DC villains that will change the way you view them forever. 

Discover your next favorite show with the ultimate Streaming TV guide and watchlist.Try our free app
  • From Redditor u/generalzee:

    Joker, although a lying psychopath, is actually the hero in The Dark Knight. Before the Joker, Gotham was a mess. Entire sections of the city were closed off due to madness, organized crime ran rampant, and the majority of important city officials were wildly corrupt. The city even tolerated a renegade vigilante who ran around wearing a rubber suit (Okay, special armor and carbon fiber, but they don't know that).

    Along comes the Joker, and by the end of a very short time, almost all organized crime was eliminated, many corrupt officials were imprisoned or dead, and the city's Vigilante even went into hiding for eight years. This was all part of Joker's masterfully executed plan.

    Everyone must realize that Joker, despite his claim otherwise, really was "The Man With The Plan" throughout the entire film. The very first thing we see Joker do is rob a mafia-controlled bank, eliminating the entire team of expert bank robbers who helped him pull it off. Of course, the robbery wasn't about the money. It was about luring Lau out of hiding, preferably with all the major crime families' collective money.

    This works beautifully, and as Joker predicts, Batman goes to Hong Kong to "Extradite" Lau. Now Lau is in a safe place that Joker can, amazingly, access with ease. This, of course, is all just the plot of the film, but Joker is playing it amazingly, murdering key criminals and corrupt officials that could help insulate those at the top. Dent actually argues FOR insulating the men on the top in the interest of cleaning the streets of lower-level goons, but Joker knows that won't work in the long-term.

    At this point, we honestly just have three men battling for Gotham's "soul" (as Joker puts it), but Dent and Wayne are simply playing into Joker's greater plan. This even extends to Joker's threats to destroy a hospital. With Batman and Gordon's help, Joker helps them root out corrupt police officials. Dent even kills some of those officials later in the film.
    Gordon's promotion, too, did a major service to Gotham. I think a lot of people take the Joker's clapping during Gordon's promotion scene to be sarcastic, but I actually think that Joker believed in Gordon, one of the few officers on the force who was truly incorruptible.

    Now Joker has a pretty clear path to getting rid of the Organized Crime problem and the corrupt officials' problem, but the Vigilante problem remains. As we saw at the beginning of the film, Batman was inspiring other vigilantes, and a society cannot stand when each man takes his own justice. This symbol of fear and unbridled vengeance, as Joker sees it, needs to be stopped, but not Killed. If he were killed, he would just be a martyr, and his symbol would live on. Of course, since Dent was a far better symbol for the city, he would make a far better martyr.

    I don't know if Joker actually intended for Harvey to be so physically scarred by the explosion from which Batman saved him, but I am certain that he wanted Harvey to feel the full pain of Rachel's death, which is why he purposely tells Batman to go to the wrong address. He knows what Rachel's death would do to Harvey psychologically and that Batman would eventually have no choice but to kill Harvey. This breaks Batman psychologically and also makes him a villain, a true villain, the kind that abandons his own principles. Batman now has no choice but to disappear, leaving his memory to fade into something of an urban legend by the time of TDKR.

    When we pick up in the next film, we see a defeated Bruce Wayne who had retired eight years prior. The city was safe and peaceful (until Bane shows up) and doesn't need constant vigilante justice to keep it safe. Joker shows Batman the error of his ways but does so in a totally devastating way.

    Even the display with the two boats at the film's climax only served to prove to the people of Gotham that they wouldn't turn on each other. He proved that there was good even in the most supposedly despicable of Gotham's inmates.

    In the end, Gotham is actually clean. It wasn't because of Harvey, who died too soon to do any good, except as a martyr, and it wasn't because of Batman, who was ostracized and treated like the criminal such a vigilante truly is for eight years. Gotham was safe because the Joker had cleaned up the streets. He eliminated the corrupt police, he destroyed organized crime financially, he uplifted Gotham's spirit, and he even got rid of the flying pest that had been corrupting Gotham ever since he declared himself its protector.

    Possible theory?
  • Photo: DC Comics

    From Redditor u/EquivalentInflation:

    When Lexcorp first started, it was wealthy, but not especially so. It took up only about ten floors of an office building. It also focused solely on aerospace engineering. Later though, it became a massive corporation, buying up hundreds of smaller companies, and according to Superman, employing nearly 2/3rds of Metropolis alone. It covered tons of markets: medicine, beauty, educational materials, chemical engineering, software design, real estate, media, and more. In comics, Lexcorp is generally portrayed as a mix of Amazon, Google, and Apple combined.

    So, how did Luthor manage to turn a relatively small company into a business conglomerate capable of overthrowing major world powers? Easy: Luthor owns several construction companies and manufactures fights with Superman to trash the city and create a market. Lex would spend a fraction of his money on some kryptonite, or a robot, then make back his investment ten times over when Superman trashed a few city blocks fighting it. We’ve repeatedly seen how Superman has no real idea of mitigating collateral damage and considers throwing someone through a building a viable option to destroy them, so Lex would be practically guaranteed a positive return.

    Possible theory?
  • 3

    Patton Oswalt Theorizes That The Joker In 'The Dark Knight' Is Ex-Military Intelligence

    From Redditor u/ghost_mv:

    I’ve always liked the theory that Heath Ledger’s Joker in Christopher Nolan’s DARK KNIGHT is a war veteran suffering PTSD. His referencing a “truckload of soldiers” getting blown up, his ease with military hardware, and his tactical ingenuity and precision planning all feel like an ex-Special Forces soldier returned stateside and dishing out payback. I love films that contain enough thought and shading to sustain post-screening theorizing like this.

    But I just re-watched THE DARK KNIGHT, and another wrinkle came to mind about The Joker.

    What if he’s not only ex-military, but ex-military intelligence?

    You can read the full theory here.

    Possible theory?
  • From Redditor u/Gaalsien:

    TL;DR: The threat of doomsday mutation shackled Kryptonians to a dead planet and stagnated their society.

    After watching Man of Steel, I was left with the obvious question of ‘why don’t Kryptonians exist outside their solar system?’. Why do they shackle themselves to a planet with a sun and atmosphere that is literally poison to them? Especially when it is shown that they had colonies at one point, though these colonists have all since died. Did they just voluntarily withdraw to a backwater hellhole of a world rather than enjoy a galaxy of superpowers? This seems odd. 

    Then in Batman v Superman, when Lex attempts to create a mutated Kryptonian, the computer warns, /‘Action forbidden - it has been decreed by the council of Krypton that none will ever again give life to a deformity so hateful to sight and memory - the desecration without name.’/

    This clearly indicates that a Doomsday-like entity has occurred before, most likely through mutation, and presumably caused such destruction that anything risking the creation of another such being was forbidden. This potentially sheds light on why all Kryptonians are generated from the Codex, which appears to be a repository of DNA from an ancient ancestor and doing this would ensure that the gene pool never strays too far, and that genetic drift never moves them away from baseline Kryptonian stock into mutant, doomsday-ey territory. This is why natural Kryptonian conception is HERESY, as the random mixing of genes could potentially create an unstoppable monster.

    My theory is that, at one point in the distant past, the Kryptonians had a decent interstellar empire, expanding and colonizing yellow-sun worlds with access to their full Kryptonian capabilities and reproducing naturally, until eventually, one or more Doomsday mutants started to be born. As shown in the BvS, Doomsday just gets more and more powerful the longer it is alive. Assuming they have all of superman’s powers dialed up to 11, they are capable of flying in space, potentially becoming a roving, interstellar threat. Before long, the empire would be beset by unbeatable monsters destroying colonies left, right, and center.

    The last Kryptonians retreated to the only place the monsters couldn’t go - Krypton. The red sun would drain the doomsdays’ powers the moment they entered the star system, and the atmosphere would render them weak to their weaponry. The Codex was set up to regulate births, and the population indoctrinated with a fear of leaving the planet (even in the face of certain destruction) as doing so might risk luring this mutant threat to Krypton. Eventually, the doomsdays died off, but by that point, Kryptonian civilization had turned too stagnant and fearful to venture out again.

    Possible theory?