Dock Ock survives?

Doctor Octopus in SM3?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Other

  • I'm not sure (Maybe)


Results are only viewable after voting.
FaT_tONle said:
Ock can easily be back for a SInister Six movie... if they want to bring em back they will... if they don't he's dead... but he can easily be brought back... Raimi or Molina NEVER ruled it out... neither did Sony... if Superhero wants to say he's dead and that's a fact... well that's just adamant and not an opinion becaus we don't know...

A siniter six movie? That'd be terrific.:up:
 
Gold Goblin gave me a good idea... introduce Nick Fury and the S.H.I.E.L.D holding some super villains captive... Ock included... that's th best way to do it...
 
I'd rather he's not in SM3 but I can see him coming back in future movies.
 
TheFlyinRussian said:
^But then what? "Hey let's all go get Spider-Man." "Okay."

Read my plot somewhere around pg 7... King Pin works with Fury to create the Sinister SIx... it's cheezy but I just wanted to include as many characters possible... if they make a new trilogy (not a reboot)... you just can't go to villain A to villain B to villain C even if you have more time to develop the villains if they each have their own flicks... Sinister Six can be built up in 1 or 2 movies leading to the culmination of an epic finale in SM6...
 
A Sinister Six movie would basically be the easy way out of making a new SM movie, no matter how much the budget would be. It would rely on more action that story. And that would be lame. There wouldn't be enough Spider-man time. The villains would need so much focus. And if Spider-man is not the main focus, then that's a sucky SM movie.
 
TheFlyinRussian said:
F*** Ock. He's a great villain, but he already had a whole movie to himself. I'd rather see Kaine as a main villain then The Return Of Doc Ock.

Haha. Kaine. Good one. :up:
 
As you know I am not an advocate of sequels ^^^... but I mean if we get like five movies about Spiderman... you might as well thrown in 90% action in the final flick... how much more can you develop one guy... all of it is hypothetical... but for one minute assume they do make six movies... Spiderman would still be the main focus but I don't think you'd have to develop him in the 6th since he has been established in five previous films...
 
FaT_tONle said:
As you know I am not an advocate of sequels ^^^... but I mean if we get like five movies about Spiderman... you might as well thrown in 90% action in the final flick... how much more can you develop one guy... all of it is hypothetical... but for one minute assume they do make six movies... Spiderman would still be the same focus but I don't think you'd have to develop him in the 6th since he has been established in five previous films...

The only point of making a Spider-man movie to to develop the character. What's the point of telling another Spider-man story if we see nothing new from the character, besides fighting new villains? That's why I can't see a good reason to make a sequel. This is the best way to end it.

Anyway, as for a 90% action flick: That's not something I want to see. It would be almost embrassing to watch, no matter how great the action was, and that would be a situation where the studio put that together just for the dough, not even caring about making a good film. The Spidey films need to be of the same quality or better for them to continue, and Sony knows that. That's why they're topping the past 2 with part 3. :up:
 
theShape said:
The only point of making a Spider-man movie to to develop the character. What's the point of telling another Spider-man story if we see nothing new from the character, besides fighting new villains? That's why I can't see a good reason to make a sequel. This is the best way to end it.

Anyway, as for a 90% action flick: That's not something I want to see. It would be almost embrassing to watch, no matter how great the action was, and that would be a situation where the studio put that together just for the dough, not even caring about making a good film. The Spidey films need to be of the same quality or better for them to continue, and Sony knows that. That's why they're topping the past 2 with part 3. :up:

I am not disagreeing with you... for the most part... I am just looking for ways of getting around 3 being the finale... since sequels are almost impossible to avoid... I am just looking for what directions could be the best way to go in order to tackle them... some idiot (or genious) will make em eventually... just wondering where he might start...
 
FaT_tONle said:
I am not disagreeing with you... for the most part... I am just looking for ways of getting around 3 being the finale... since sequels are almost impossible to avoid... I am just looking for what directions could be the best way to go in order to tackle them... some idiot (or genious) will make em eventually... just wondering where he might start...

Yeah, I feel you, man. I just don't want the series to go downhill, and it can easily happen. That's why they should go out while they're at the top of their game now. :up:
 
I don't think Doc Ock is dead. We saw that he was descenting into the bottom of the ocean, but if his tentacles get reactivated they can save him (and themselves) without him being conscious. Yes yes, we saw that the tentacles' lights were fickering out, but that doesn't mean they won't be turn out later.

Anyway, if Raimi and Molina expressed interest for the good doctor to come back (in Spider-man 4 or later), then he will be back. Fans will still go see the movie regardless they are satisfied with the explaination or not; it's not a big deal.
 
I just can't understand why Raimi would want him back in the script. The easier option would be to kill him off. One of the worst things you can do to a movie is keeping a villain coming back from the dead. He's ****ing dead, so he won't be coming back. I'm sure Raimi isn't as stupid as he looks!
 
He's had his movie, let someone else have screen time. At most he should be mentioned on a tv news report as having escaped/been in court, some small cameo like that, but not an actual part in the movie. It's crowded as is.
 
Mr. Superhero said:
I just can't understand why Raimi would want him back in the script. The easier option would be to kill him off. One of the worst things you can do to a movie is keeping a villain coming back from the dead. He's ****ing dead, so he won't be coming back. I'm sure Raimi isn't as stupid as he looks!

We are talking about a movie decades away... new directors... new actors... new stories...
 
Doc Ock didn't survive, I know that for sure.

One of the producers says, on the second disk of the DVD set, that Ock "essentially drowns himself"...so walah!...No more Dock...thankgod! He was a ****e boss...
 
Lets ask Doc Ock.

Doctor Otto Octavious, will you come back?

kinopoiskruspiderman2500x333296921xm4.jpg
 
Mr. Superhero said:
Doc Ock didn't survive, I know that for sure.

One of the producers says, on the second disk of the DVD set, that Ock "essentially drowns himself"...so walah!...No more Dock...thankgod! He was a ****e boss...

Listen, I know you don't want him back, and that's fine. But stop being such an ass about it.

As for this producer you heard, was it Avi Arad?? Because Avi Arad, Raimi and Molina himself have all said he did not die. He just disappeared. He was not pronounced dead, he was not buried 6ft under. We saw him sink into the water with the tentacles lights flickering off.

Big whoop. That's one of the most open 'demises' I've ever seen.

So unless you can top the word of Arad,Raimi and Molina, I'll take their word, and not some fanboy's who's got some chip on his shoulder about it.
 
Point is Ock is dead. But if Raimi and co. wanted to bring him back...they most certainly could.
 
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"