Mads Mikkelsen is Kaecilius Thread

[Doctor Octopus]

The problem with Spidey villains is that I can't really see any of them on a big global event like I can (and have seen) a Dr. Doom, Magneto or Loki which tend to be the big three who have general audience recognition and have been used when there's a big event/crossover in several media.

Dr Octopus could.

 

[Michael Frost]

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.

 

[metaphysician]

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.

 

[Henshin]

Once again, after watching that last Doctor Strange featurette, Kaecilius really sounds like Kaluu - was good, seduced by the dark arts, etc. Then again, the breaking down barriers thing really sounds like Mordo wanting to bring over Dormammu.

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.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

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.

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.

 

[Michael Frost]

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.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

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.

 

[metaphysician]

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.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Spider-Man defeat Dr Doom before. Spider-Man defeat lots of world threaten villains before.

 

[metaphysician]

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.

 

[Michael Frost]

Spider-Man defeat Dr Doom before. Spider-Man defeat lots of world threaten villains before.

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.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

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.

Disagreed. It not bad writing. Spidey smart enough and strong enough to stop villains who threat to world like Dr Doom.

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.

Agreed but Spidey villains like Dr Octopus can be world threatening and have been sometimes. Thats all I mean.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

https://www.reddit.com/r/marvelstudios/comments/56w0q6/hey_everyone_reading_through_everything_will/

What I wanted was a villain driven by a compelling agenda. He is a man of ideas. He has a cogent, defendable point of view, which is what I always find interesting in antagonists and villains.

 

[BaelaTargaryen]

HOW DOCTOR STRANGE'S DIRECTOR IS MAKING MADS MIKKELSEN'S KAECILIUS A COMPELLING VILLAIN

Marvel films have a villain problem, something that's been discussed again and again as the Marvel Cinematic Universe has evolved. While the film series has spawned beloved superheroes and interesting antagonists like Loki and Thanos, it's also had a trend of producing forgettable single-movie villains (Malekith, Ronan, Yellowjacket, Abomination, etc.) that serve more as a way to elevate the film's titular Avenger and push them a step closer to their superhero allies than offer any sort of actual threat.

As the MCU builds up towards its anticipated face-off against the big bad Thanos, it's a problem that is going to be more pronounced in its latest batch of Avengers origin movies. When I got a chance to talk to Doctor Strange director Scott Derrickson after a sneak peek screening event for the movie, I asked him how he plans to deal with that with this film's villain, Mads Mikkelsen's Kaecilius.

"I think there's some validity to that," he said. "What you have to do is you have to understand that you've got a limited amount of real estate; what can you do with that real estate that keeps them from being two-dimensional? In this case, I became very interested in Kaecilius's point of view and what makes him tick because, in the end, the villains that I have loved in movies, it all comes back to their ideology, what's their philosophy.

"What we do have is a villain who has a very cogent point of view," Derrickson added. "He's a man of ideas, and the way he thinks and what he is motivated by has some merit, and it pushes the movie into some moral ambiguities, into some moral questions, that I think is really interesting."

Derrickson credited the longevity of some of Marvel's villains as being the reason they're elevated above their peers, noting, "Loki becomes iconic through Thor 2 and through The Avengers. He's very good in the first Thor movie, but I don't think that in movie as itself he would have been remembered as an iconic villain." He also referenced the Joker and Doc Ock as being particularly notable comic book movie villains because they came after the establishment of their iconic heroes. Derrickson called out two of his favorite film villains as examples of characters who are examples of what he is trying to accomplish with Kaecilius.

"My two favorite villain scenes in terms of classic villains are probably John Doe in the back of the police car in Seven describing why he was doing what he was doing, because he was horrifyingly cogent and sensible," Derrickson said. "That was the scariest part of that movie to me, watching it going, 'Oh s--t, he's making sense! This can't be! The world can't be like this!' And the Joker when he lays out his anarchistic philosophy to Harvey Dent. That's my favorite scene in that movie."

 

[Iceman]

Kaecilius was cool but didn't get enough time to leave much of a lasting impression.

 

[Alex Murphy]

Kaecilius was cool but didn't get enough time to leave much of a lasting impression.

Agreed.

 

[Loki882]

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."

 

[JKKS085]

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.

 

[AlluAllu]

I agree that Mikkelsen's talent could have been better used elsewhere, but his performance added extra to a perfectly good throw away villain.

 

[Mjölnir]

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.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

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."

Totally agreed, he was really wasted.

 

[TheVileOne]

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.

 

[Web-Head]

Kaecilius was cool but didn't get enough time to leave much of a lasting impression.

Had a feeling this would be the case. Especially in Doctor Strange's origin story.

 

[Iceman]

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.

 

[Loki882]

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.