Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Doctor Strange' started by GoblinScrier, Apr 21, 2016.
Dr Octopus could.
Sure. So could Norman.
But in general, Spidey's villains tend to be more up close and personal to his universe and don't bleed out into the harbingers of world threatening events nearly as much as the ones I mentioned.
I mean, Spidey's villain are certainly there, getting their share, but Ock tends to serve as a "general" more than he gets to call all the shots.
Also, even those guys don't *really* support big global events. They've been given them, but its generally required a lot of gimmes. As famous and popular as he may be, Spider-man just isn't a world striding hero who fights world-striding villains.
This is what confuses me the most. It feels like they should've just had Mordo being the villain seeing as it's basically his storyline. Kaecilius is not that much like Kaluu tbh, Kaluu is as old as the Ancient One and they have a huge past together. The Zealot makes him out to be a mix of Strange and Mordo.
Dr Octopus form and lead the Sinister Six. I think he more of a leader than follower. He too egotistical not to call the shots lol.
And for what? To get Spiderman. He's a brilliant scientist and yeah he can lead a couple of mooks but in general he doesn't really get that involved with world ending scenarios as much as Loki, Dr Doom and Magneto tend to, which was my point.
I love him as a Spiderman villain tho. He's definitely part of the big Spidey triumvirate of danger: Ock, Goblin & Venom.
First time he make Sinister Six in 60's was to get Spider-Man. He gather team twice again since to take over world. He nearly do it too.
Eh, its kind of stretched disbelief both times. You can gather all the Spider-villains you want, its really not going to do anything for conquering the world, or even a nation.
The core "problem", if you can even call it a problem, is that is that if either Spider-man or the core Spider rogues get upgraded to Avengers-class, then the comic loses a lot of its traditional focus. You can't have "Spider-man the plucky underdog swinging the streets of New York", "Spider-man defeats his nemesis, Doctor Octopus", and "Doctor Octopus is a world-threatening supervillain" all at the same time.
Spider-Man defeat Dr Doom before. Spider-Man defeat lots of world threaten villains before.
And Hulk has been choked out by an ordinary snake. This is called "comics often suffer from bad writing". Such as in the infamous case of Spider-man vs Firelord, we he somehow beat a Herald of Galactus by. . . punching him repeatedly? Despite the immediate prior *and* succeeding stories showing that, indeed, Firelord is a guy who dukes it out with Thor and Hercules, and gets into blaster fights with Death Stars.
Nobody is saying that Spidey can't defeat one of the big baddies.
This whole point is about thematic resonance - Spider-man is about patrolling the streets, doing the best he can to help out the city while also having to worry about mundane things like paying rent and not being late for a date. Sure, he can hold his own against or stand side-by-side with Marvel's finest characters but that's not his point as a character, as a story.
So his villains aren't really the best at world threatening scenarios because they don't NEED to be. I'm sure they could be written that way but that's not their point as this hero's specific antagonists. There's a good reason why traditionally most of Spiderman's rogues had mainly one motivation: money. It's because they are obstacles in Peter's life, difficulties that he most overcome as a regular human being. Do I stop that guy from robbing that bank or do I miss this really important test? That's pretty much Spidey 101.
Disagreed. It not bad writing. Spidey smart enough and strong enough to stop villains who threat to world like Dr Doom.
Agreed but Spidey villains like Dr Octopus can be world threatening and have been sometimes. Thats all I mean.
HOW DOCTOR STRANGE'S DIRECTOR IS MAKING MADS MIKKELSEN'S KAECILIUS A COMPELLING VILLAIN
Kaecilius was cool but didn't get enough time to leave much of a lasting impression.
He had potential. But again, he was underused and underdeveloped. He didn't get enough screentime and he wasn't all that interesting when he was onscreen.
Also the trend of Marvel getting great actors to play their villains and then underutilizing them is getting tedious for me personally. I kept thinking "you don't need an actor of Mads Mikkelsen'd caliber to play this part, if this is all that you're going to do with him."
My sentiment exactly. I don't think there's inherently something wrong with the way Kaecilius was written and portrayed (although I do think that a little more screentime and a more elaborate costume design could have helped him stand out more), he was certainly a satisfactory vilain in an origin movie in which the primary focus should be on the titular hero. But indeed why waste Mikkelsen on such an expendable character while he could have been a fantastic Dormammu down the line ?
I'm wondering if playing Kaecilius, a one and done vilain, wasn't a way for Mikkelsen to make up for dropping out of Thor The Dark World, the same way Idris Elba is pilling up voice acting duties for Disney so he can get out of his Marvel contract.
I agree that Mikkelsen's talent could have been better used elsewhere, but his performance added extra to a perfectly good throw away villain.
I agree. Look at Ajax in Deadpool. A similar small role for the villain in the narrative, and I think he worked for what he was, but the presence of the actors are noticeably different.
Totally agreed, he was really wasted.
It's one thing to say you want and have a compelling villain. It's another matter to execute that.
To me, what kind of annoys me about Idris Elba as Heimdall isn't that a black actor is playing Heimdall, but more that it's a waste of Idris Elba's obvious talents. I feel like he would've been better as a different more prominent character. Heck, before Chadwick Boseman, Elba would've been my ideal candidate for T'Challa.
Had a feeling this would be the case. Especially in Doctor Strange's origin story.
Yes, unfortunately the case as I think there was room to make this character better otherwise. Hopefully the sequel will give a bit more focus to the villain too as Strange will be well established by then.
Well if the villain in the sequel is who it seems like it'll be, then they did a far better job of setting them up as at least potentially a more compelling/fleshed-out villain that Kaecilius was here.
They might still flub the landing for all we know, but the potential is definitely there.