Sequels Carnage Casting

[Eddie Brock]

i know i know. but if they were to do him they need to DEVELOPE him. i dont think carnage sucks but for a movie? i think id be weird but id like to see it. i know alot would more than me and im for it but not in spiderman 4. o god no

There's nothing to develop. He's a psychopath. He's such a flat character, it's not even funny.

But if they want to add depth, they can always implicate him in Uncle Ben's murder.

 

[comic_book_guy]

Nice!, im pretty much a newb on adobe photoshop and i was just wondering how you make the carnage effect? that would help me alot =)

 

[Harry Goblin]

There's nothing to develop. He's a psychopath. He's such a flat character, it's not even funny.

But if they want to add depth, they can always implicate him in Uncle Ben's murder.

thats kinda what i said. theres nothing to develope but if they do put him in they should do something with him not in the comics.

i loled at the murder thing

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

There's nothing to develop. He's a psychopath. He's such a flat character, it's not even funny.

But if they want to add depth, they can always implicate him in Uncle Ben's murder.

Psychopaths don't have to be flat characters. He can be given emotional depth. I mean, not Sandman-style emotional depth, where he's basically a good guy, but some legitimate explanation for why he's a psychopath. I mean, in real life, a person's psychopathic tendencies go deeper than most people think.

Granted, I don't think they should do Carnage. You can't do him right without making the movie rated R and completely unpleasant.

 

[Harry Goblin]

Psychopaths don't have to be flat characters. He can be given emotional depth. I mean, not Sandman-style emotional depth, where he's basically a good guy, but some legitimate explanation for why he's a psychopath. I mean, in real life, a person's psychopathic tendencies go deeper than most people think.

Granted, I don't think they should do Carnage. You can't do him right without making the movie rated R and completely unpleasant.

true but i mean he has to have some attachment to peter. i cant think of one. and ur right if they made the movie they would have to just show like shadows of death which wouldnt hold up well with the fans

 

[AIRWOLF]

There's nothing to develop. He's a psychopath. He's such a flat character, it's not even funny.

But if they want to add depth, they can always implicate him in Uncle Ben's murder.

Yeah, thats one way. I can picture it:

Cpt Stacy: This is your Uncle Ben's real killer, we lost his trail few weeks ago.

Gives Peter the Photo.

Cpt Stacy: His name is Cletus Kasady.

Peter: I though Flint Marko killed my Uncle.

Cpt Stacy: Well, he was just an accomplice. According to what we have gathered so far, it was Kasady that forced Marko to kill your Uncle.

Peter leaves the room, enraged.

 

[Harry Goblin]

LMAO ok theres so many funy ways to do this. lol.

 

[Matt.S99]

lol ben has so many killers, whats, hes probabably part of some big ass mafia and everyone wanted to kill him lol

 

[AIRWOLF]

lol ben has so many killers, whats, hes probabably part of some big ass mafia and everyone wanted to kill him lol

LOL. Make a line behind Marko.

 

[Z4CH]

Which guy from Harry Potter?

No, Bartie Crouch's son, the one who goes as a fake mad eye the entire movie.

 

[GoldGoblin]

Cletus doesn't need development.

Hence why Carnage is such a crap character.

^

 

[TheCaptain22555]

Carnage should only be casted for a college fanboy's student film, not for Spider-Man 4 and for this reason alone I nominate myself for the part.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

true but i mean he has to have some attachment to peter. i cant think of one. and ur right if they made the movie they would have to just show like shadows of death which wouldnt hold up well with the fans

I disagree that everyone has to have some connection to Peter. I know they've done it that way for all the villains so far, but I think it'll feel stale very soon unless they can do them VERY creatively, which, so far, they have not.

 

[Buford The Sly]

true but i mean he has to have some attachment to peter. i cant think of one. and ur right if they made the movie they would have to just show like shadows of death which wouldnt hold up well with the fans

Wouldn't Spider-man be in part responsible for Carnage if they went the route of the sample he gave to Dr. Conners? There's a connection for you.
Imagine the impact of all the deaths that a Carnage rampage would have on Parker's psyche. In the comics the symbiote was Brock's property when it "reproduced" therefore Spidey doesn't feel responsible, he's just compelled to stop him. I don't think you have to have Venom to do Carnage as a villian.

 

[GreenMamba]

Granted, I don't think they should do Carnage. You can't do him right without making the movie rated R and completely unpleasant.

Where did you people get the idea that Carnage is only R-rated material? Have you read the source comics? The original appearances of Carnage? All of the deaths he inflicted were entirely PG-13 oriented, mostly off-panel, no more R-rated than the hospital scene in Spider-man 2.

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

Where did you people get the idea that Carnage is only R-rated material? Have you read the source comics? The original appearances of Carnage? All of the deaths he inflicted were entirely PG-13 oriented, mostly off-panel, no more R-rated than the hospital scene in Spider-man 2.

It's not so much that it'd be graphic, onscreen death, but the very nature of a a mass-murdering maniac... it really pushes the limits of PG-13, regardless of whether it's shown or not.

 

[Harry Goblin]

Wouldn't Spider-man be in part responsible for Carnage if they went the route of the sample he gave to Dr. Conners? There's a connection for you.
Imagine the impact of all the deaths that a Carnage rampage would have on Parker's psyche. In the comics the symbiote was Brock's property when it "reproduced" therefore Spidey doesn't feel responsible, he's just compelled to stop him. I don't think you have to have Venom to do Carnage as a villian.

you got me there. but that isnt much of a connection. i mean i think its good but those critics would say its dumb. i like the idea of it tho

 

[The Top Hat]

Ben Foster. Watch the trailer for '30 days of night' and you might see what i mean.

EDIT: http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?p=11838148#post11838148

 

[Matt.S99]

he's already angel

 

[Eddie Brock]

he's already angel

Normally, I don't think that sort of thing should matter...but it does to me in this case.

 

[Matt.S99]

i dont either, but i agree, for me it matters in this case, i dont know why, it just does

 

[Eddie Brock]

i dont either, but i agree, for me it matters in this case, i dont know why, it just does

You can't go from X-Man to crazy maniac Spider-Man villain.

 

[Matt.S99]

emo x-man lol j/k

 

[ThatDamnNinja]

Okay, this whole Ben Foster business is another example of people only suggesting guys for Carnage who've already done the EXACT SAME THING they want them to do for Carnage.

No one would have thrown Ben Foster's name out there before the 30 Days of Night trailer or pictures. But now "Oh, he's playing a crazy, bloodthristy killer redhead in THIS movie... HE CAN PLAY CARNAGE!"

Do people have no imagination? I mean, this must be the case, because otherwise, the thought process seems to be, "If the actor hasn't done that sort of thing before, it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to do!" Which of course falls apart with the notion of "There's a first time for everything."

So on that note, if Carnage is ever introduced, I want him played by someone who has never, ever played a maniacal killer.

 

[Matt.S99]

probably because mayb people think some people cant play those roles