Grammar question about relative pronoun

[Mac]

"The Joker is the most famous villain which comics have created."

Why is the relative pronoun WHICH in the defining relative clause WHICH CINEMA HAS CREATED?

Do relative pronouns not refer anaphorically (backwards), rather than cataphorically (forwards)?

How can the relative pronoun WHICH refer cataphorically (forwards) to COMICS, and not anaphorically (backwards) to VILLAIN?

Should the relative pronoun WHICH not refer cataphorically (forwards) to COMICS and be WHO?

(The relative pronoun 'which' is for things. The relative pronoun 'who' is for people.)

[The Governess]

You are right, it does refer back to villain. Does a villain necessarily need to be a who/whom? Can a villain be a that/which?

It’s an awkward sentence. If you were diagramming the relative clause, you’d rearrange it to “comics have created which”. “Which” is the direct object, so I guess you could use “whom” instead of “which”. But I also take issue with the idea that comics created something… comic writers, maybe?

i’f probably rephrase to: The Joker is the most famous villain in the comic universe. Or something else that avoids that particular construction altogether. 

Edited May 31 by The Governess

[Gil]

That's a super awkward sentence and it sounds "foreign" to my native English mind. Mostly because no one speaks like that.

Some more natural phrasing suggestions are:

The Joker is the most famous comic villain.

The Joker is the most famous comic villain ever created.

The Joker, a comic villain, has become the most famous villain ever created.

[Mac]

Thank you, Governess and Gil.

Allow me to rephrase the sentence into something simpler:

"He is the man which cinema has created."

Do you still stand by your arguments?