Tragic or Terrifying: Kingpin's Role In Marvel's Civil War II

by Vince Brusio

What makes a man great? What makes him an entrepreneur instead of an “opportunist.” Who or what has the last word on what his worth is both morally and ethically? Interesting questions all, aren’t they? In this in-depth interview with writer Matthew Rosenberg, we ask him about why he chose to write Civil War II: Kingpin #1 (MAY160751)? The answers were so profound, we thought we had returned to graduate school to debate John Milton’s classic, Paradise Lost.

Civil War II: Kingpin #1 (MAY160751) is in comic shops July 6.

**********

PREVIEWSworld: What sparked the idea to show Wilson Fisk benefiting from heroes fighting heroes in Civil War II: Kingpin #1?

Matthew Rosenberg: One of the things that makes Fisk fun is that he is an opportunist. He sees and tries to play every angle. And he does that all the time when the heroes are watching for it. It just make logical sense that he would go for it in a bigger way when all the heroes are off going to war with each other. Watching Wilson Fisk take advantage of bad situations is half the fun.

PREVIEWSworld: Will this story be more plot driven, or will you be spending more time to show the complexities and traits of the character?

Matthew Rosenberg: I like to think it will be a healthy mix of both. Characters are what drive plots, or good ones anyway. And Fisk is a great one. Who he is, his complexities, drive the plot. For people looking for a crime story about a man building an empire, this is for you. And for readers who want to see a troubled character willing to do whatever he can to try and make a mark in the world, then this is also for you.

PREVIEWSworld: Did actor Vincent D'Onofrio's large-yet-vulnerable performance as Kingpin in the Netflix Daredevil series have any impact on how you think about the character? Did you think of the character differently once the first season of Daredevil concluded?

Matthew Rosenberg: Not really, no. I think Vincent D'Onofrio did a great job as the Kingpin, but so much of what I loved in his performance was very influenced by some of my favorite Kingpin comics. The Steve Dillon / Jason Aaron Punisher Max series, the Alex Maleev / Brian Michael Bendis stuff, and obviously all of Frank Miller's various Daredevil issues had a huge impact on the show and on me. And Ed Brubaker and David Aja's Daredvil #116 may be my favorite Marvel comic of all time. So I'm pulling a lot of influence from all those places.

A weird story though- when they were still casting the Daredevil show I was working in a comic shop in New York to make ends meet. Vincent D'Onofrio came in and asked me for good Kingpin stories he could use to study up on. I recommended all of that stuff to him and we discussed the character for a long time. In the end he walked out with an armload of books and thanked me for the help. So in a way you could say I influenced his portrayal of Kingpin. Well... no, you really couldn't say that at all. But it is a funny story in hindsight. Also, he was Thor in Adventures in Babysitting so that was pretty cool.

PREVIEWSworld: Why write about a villain? What attracts you to get inside the mind of a man who (in the MCU) will sacrifice his own son to save his own skin?

Matthew Rosenberg: For starters I think the villains are just as important as the heroes. Especially in the Marvel Universe. Standing up and fighting for something is great, but only if we really know what you are fighting against. In that way I think the villains are just the other half of the bigger picture. They help us understand the heroes better, they help us understand the conflicts, and they make it all matter. But the heroes can't exist without the villains, while the villains would almost always exist without the heroes. Heroes are reactive, villains are active. So it makes sense to stop and follow the villains sometimes.

But more specifically I think Wilson Fisk is one of the best characters in all of comics. He isn't pure evil like Red Skull or Thanos, he isn't a madman like Norman Osborn or Loki. Fisk is smart and determined, but his desire to succeed overpowers his sense of right and wrong. He is as driven as the great heroes, it's just that his moral compass doesn't work. In that way I think he is a classically tragic figure. He wants to be great, he wants great things for himself and his city, but his willingness to do anything to get those things is his undoing. It's easy to imagine a world where Wilson Fisk is a great man, he certainly does. But because of what he is willing to do to get there, he never will.

PREVIEWSworld: The heroes see Fisk as a villain. Fisk sees himself differently. Anyone with a knowledge of Satan’s character in Milton’s Paradise Lost knows this is a time-tested conundrum. Where do you stand on judging Fisk? Is he more Fisk, or more Kingpin?

Matthew Rosenberg: There are a lot of parallels between Milton's Satan and Wilson Fisk. Both are characters who are "self-raised," both command armies based on their hatred of being subjugated, and both of them would tell you that that it is "better to reign in hell than serve in heaven." But the difference is that in Paradise Lost Satan is really leading a civil war against God. He is a tragic figure in many ways because there is some truth to his argument but he can't possibly win. But Fisk isn't leading an army in Marvel's civil war, he is looking for ways around it. He is looking out for himself. And, in doing so, he becomes something very different from Milton's character. Wilson Fisk isn't tragic because he loses the fight of good vs evil, he's tragic because he never even chooses a side.