By definition, the Antichrist can never be "right".
You mean strictly Biblically. I'd get away from that.
Then I would not call him the Anti-Christ. Use of that term implies the Biblical variety.
As you say, you can have an AC-*like* character. But it won't literally *be* the AC unless you want to tell a Biblical story (although don't most people think that Lucas Buck was in fact the devil?). I don't mean to sound like a Bible-thumper, but there we are.
I dunno, I thought Nicolae Carpathia was fairly well characterized. I wonder how close they got in the film versions.Else, you end up with an unbelievable, boring as all fuck and nigh cartoonish moustache twirler.
Actually, by strict definition "Anti-Christ" would be anyone opposed to Christ.
"Right" and "Morally Correct" are not the same thing. Right, wrong and moral correctness are colored by observation and personal viewpoint.
An Anti-Christ character would have to be right or correct quite often. If they were a complete nitwit or buffoon then they would never be able to gain or keep any type of political or military power.
You would also have to have people that honestly felt or believed this guy was right, correct and worth following. People from all walks of life from the common man up to rich, powerful and intelligent individuals.
Has he always been an Anti-Christ type of personality or was this something that grew over time?