Cullen said:
Sorry, sorry, sorry. Meant to answer this post when I first saw it, but life up and smacked me in the face.
Yes. I mean NO! NOT IN THE SLIGHTEST!
Well get on it, man! Get help while you you're still-- I mean, while
we're still young!!
I like the Vulture a great deal, don't get me wrong, but he never was in the same sort of league as Ock or the Goblin. Ock tends to be city threatening event-unto-himself, while Goblin has a Moriarity vibe to him. He's more of a casual enemy rather than the full scale nemesis the other two are.
And while he'd be good in a one scene fight (with maybe appearances later)... I think that's underusing him. I can think of three scenes I'd like to see: The Vulture dropping Spider-man in the water tank (from his first appearance, of course), The Vulture dropping Spidey from a great height, and the finale be their battle through the Daily Bugle (his second appearance, needless to say).
Now that would be spectacular.
Damn right, it would. I have to keep the Vulture's screen time limited due to all the awesome Parker/Spidey/Ock content I want to cram into a long (at least 2.5 hours) but still all-too-short running time. Keep in mind, I want to maximize the use of all the important supporting characters like Aunt May, J. Jonah Jameson, Joe Robertson, Betty Brant, Flash Thompson and Liz Allen. My vague estimate for how long the Vulture should be onscreen is ten minutes, but that's not set in stone (or in script, fo that matter... this is all just vague imagining that will hopefully become more and more concrete, even if it won't turn into a marketable product of any kind). I currently see the Vulture as fulfilling several important purposes for the big picture in just those few minutes. What would be ideal is if the actual execution could be done in such a way as to blow away the audience with the action and acting/dialogue and still leave them ravenously hungry for more. I don't see the Vulture coming back for another round in the first movie, and I think I'd rather not have him show up as the Vulture in the same movie as the Green Goblin (don't want them skies too crowded). While I have just a few reservations about the Vulture appearing in the same movie where Dr. Octopus comes back [I don't want it to seem like they're actually connected, and it's weird they'd both be breaking out of different prisons in the same film-- Doc Ock escaping from the Vault in Colorado and making his way back to New York, and the Vulture finding a way to break out of Riker's Island, either by cobbling together a make-shift flying machine or by... oh man, wouldn't it be something if he and Herman Schultz (the Shocker!!) worked together to get out??], I do think it would be great if he came back in movie #3. Again, if he shows up here, he serves more purposes than just being a great visual/action villain (where he could do the whole Bugle building fight with Spidey) and an excuse for Spidey to let loose with the quips (which would never be in short supply in this movie series). I just thought about how he could collaborate with Herman Schultz-- a recidivist safe-cracker with a gift for invention to rival that of Adrian Toomes-- which would set up the Shocker as an action villain for a future movie. The other thing I was thinking of was having Spider-Man see the Vulture gliding in the distance and immediately feel ill at the thought that the Green Goblin has regained the memories (both of how much of a badass he is and of Spider-Man's secret identity) he lost in movie #2 and is back in action. Oh, wait, it's the Vulture (which is a relief because he won't have to worry about Toomes stalking his loved ones, and to be honest, the Vulture is less dangerous than the Green Goblin as a villain), now meaner and more formidable than ever.
(As for Ock working in the shadows, I have two words for you: Master Planner. Great story.)
I like most of this (especially the theme.) Personally, though, I'd just use the goggle idea and keep the Vulture's costume looking like Ditko. But that's just me.
As I said somewhere in an earlier essay-- er, I mean "post"-- the Master Planner story was my idea for movie #3.
My idea for revamping the Vulture's costume was what I thought would be a reasonable concession to the "realism" junkie crowd. To be honest, I would approve of a less slightly more muted appearance of a bird of prey, with more of the technical aspect of the suit (not all, just some) made more obvious, but I wouldn't. The suit should look somewhat armored, but not too heavily. I don't think I want to make the suit an official strength-enhancing exoskeleton, but I do want Toomes to be a very strong septugenarian while he wears it. There should definitely be gauntlets on his hands, preferably with claw-like extensions. The suit color should be dark green almost all over. The goggles are necessary, for obvious reasons, and I did want to make them binocular-type instruments just so those damn reality-junkies wouldn't question why the Vulture was able to spot his prey from so very far away, and I thought a crash helmet would be appropriate, especially considering that one of the men who called himself "Vulture" in the comics saw fit to wear one. Actually, my favorite Vulture story of all time is when the real vulture broke that punk (Blackie Drago) out of prison, gave him a set of wings and then proceded to beat the living crap out of him in front of God and everybody, just to prove who the real Vulture really was. Anyway, the only other main concern with the "realism" issue is to make sure that whatever he wears around his neck (that feathery/furry collar of his) extends up far enough that it offers support and helps keep him from snapping his own neck while flying. I want it to look as close as possible to the original while making the stylish aspects into functional ones as well.
What did you have in mind when you said you wanted it to look like Ditko's design? Did you have any specific thoughts as to what the material would be made of or what the purpose of the vertical-line pattern would signify? Speak, damn you! I want your ideas!
Part of me wants, in my movies, to have Ock appear in the second film, punk Peter, then vanish from the series until, say, the fourth film. Don't ask me why; it just seems right some how.
Do you mean you would want Ock to appear in the second film after already being the main villain in the first, or to show up briefly in the second for the first time and then have a stronger presence in the fourth?
I agree with that. I don't see the need to kill any of the villians save Goblin. Although, once again, Ock has proven most indesctructable in the past, so you probably could kill him at least once, then bring him back...
I'm assuming that when you say "kill him at least once, then bring him back..." you mean have him disappear in an explosion or collapsing building or whatever, with no body being found.
I thought about going that route, and I would like that to be an option for the third movie, but I'm really in love with the possibilities inherent in having him taken into custody and imprisoned at the end of the first movie.
Y' had me right up until the "ending with Venom and the marriage of Peter Parker to Mary Jane Watson". But nopers, can't see it. Why would you want to end your series on multiple down notes?
(I've mentioned my hatred of M.J., but I also don't care for Venom. His first appearance was pitch perfect, but after that he sunk damn quick. I understand that I'm in the minority on this, and that's cool. I will add one cavet, and this applies to both characters, I think they both had and have potential for something special. It's just that I don't think that's been reached.)
Venom's involvement in the final movie would play out in tune with his first appearances. I would definitely keep the Lethal Protector aspect in that I'd have it made clear that he
thinks he's a hero and actually does save a few people from other criminals, but it would also be clear that he's a deluded hypocrite. Venom's vision of himself, his actual heroic deeds and the hypocrisy of it all are what make him interesting to me on a psychological level. I think he'd make a good movie villain if done properly.
In this series, Mary Jane would make a brief cameo in the first movie but wouldn't meet peter.
She'd meet Peter in the second movie (where he's in college and struggling to fit in with Harry Osborn, Gwen Stacy and his old nemesis Flash Thompson) and they'd be instantly attracted to each other. Due to her being far from Peter's type at the time, Peter ends up dating Gwen instead and they fall in love by the end of the second film. Mary Jane ends up dating Harry Osborn.
Things remain pretty much the same (this is discounting all the little details and exchanges these college-age kids have than don't involve romantic attachments and brushes with villainy) throughout the third movie with MJ, but Gwen is devastated by the death of her father. Things get strained between Gwen and Peter toward the end of the third one and in the fourth one, Gwen is killed and Mary Jane is there to console Peter (and also Harry, whose father was found impaled and nearly naked in one of his warehouses).
In the fifth movie, Peter and Mary Jane are falling in love (don't worry, it wouldn't be anything as sappy as Sam Raimi's movies). By the beginning of the sixth movie, Peter is in possession of the alien symbiote and has either revealed his secret to Mary Jane or she's revealed she already knew. The symbiote is rejected by Peter as soon as he learns what it is and Brock has already been fired and humiliated (it'll be something very similar to the actual story, where Brock did many interviews with a man claiming he was the notorious serial killer plaguing the city, and Spider-Man caught the real culprit). Brock meets the symbiote, it's true love, they stalk and terrorize Spider-Man and Mary Jane, Venom gets taken down, Peter and MJ get married.
I wanted to end the series here because I think Venom is the last truly great Spider-Man villain created and that the story gets much less interesting once Peter gets married. I'd try to end it on a happy note (and I don't just mean with a wedding, I mean something hardcore Spidey fans will love).
On the subject of films v. series, it's not that I don't think it can be done that it can be done on film. I just think some stories, such as the "The Night Mary Jane...", er, "The Night Gwen Stacy Died", would have more resonance as a part of a series. More time to flesh out the characters, to grow attached to them, to miss them when they're gone. An example straight off the top of my head would be the deaths of Jenny Calander and Tara on Buffy the Vampire Slayer
That's a good point, but I think it's worth a shot in a multi-film series. Done properly, there's a good chance the mvoie characters will be as compelling as the comics book characters.
I can understand you having problems with all of the characters you've listed except for Batman. Batman should be easier than Spider-man. Very few of his foes have superpowers and his actions would rarely need CGI, unlike the wallcrawler. He's the one I'd have the least problems making movies about. ('Course as my Batman knowledge stems mainly from the cartoon series, the T.V. Series, and the four or five comics I've had with him in it, I might be missing something...)
I think the Batman is definitely more difficult to sell to the public than Spider-Man. I'm not saying he isn't wildly popular, and I'm not saying I'd make any unreasonable (from a true fan's perspective) compromise if making a Batman movie franchise, and I have plenty of my own ideas about that as well. I'm saying that Spider-Man has elements from all film genres, and the Batman does not. The average Batman story is not a romance story, and when that comes into it, it's supposed to be pretty messed up. The average Batman story is not a comedy, even if it can be very funny. The average Batman story is dark, dirty and depressing. There's nothing wrong with that, and any decently made Batman story will hold true to this, but it's not as easy a sell to the "general," popcorn-munching, girl-dating, mind-numbed audience. I would never concede Spider-Man's brilliant mind when it comes to a story, even if pansies like Sam Raimi would. But Spider-Man's intelligence can be sold as were window dressing. The intelligence and brooding nature of the Batman is pervasive. It's not something important that supplements his winning personality. It is his personality. He's not a friendly, accessable guy. I have no problem with that, and that's how I like it, but the Batman as a person is not as appealing to most people as Spider-Man is. That's a problem many of DC's characters have, but the Batman especially, since he's the "jerk." He's the "obsessive-compulsive." He's the "stern authority figure." He's amazing, but he's not as "well-rounded" and universally appealling as Spider-Man. This is only important insofar as it should be child's play to make a proper Spider-Man movie, and yet they came light years closer with "Batman Begins" than they did with either Spider-Man movie. This is not tribalistic idiocy speaking. I've paid for hundreds of Spider-Man comics, and I only have as many Batman comics as I do (which still isn't even a decent fraction of how many Spider-Man comics I've acquired) because I feel guilty if I don't buy at least one comics when I'm reading a whole stack of unworthy comics at the store, and Marvel is rarely worth paying for anymore. One is not better than the other. One is just more widely marketable than the other. That's all.
Which is as it should be. The movie should be a cross between a forties detective movie like The Thin Man and a high voltage Kung Fu flick. Among other things.
Exactly.
Your thread, man. You're on topic if you say you're on topic.
And on that note I close. I tire, and there are other things I should be doing, as enjoyable as this is. I realize you have more to say on the Vulture later on, and I hope to get to it soon, as well as read any comments you have on this post.
Until then...
Happy reading. Hope your schedule is free. :0