Homecoming Should Spider-Man movies only have 1 villain?

[The Overlord]

It seems like the better Spider-Man movies (Spider-Man, Amazing Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2) stick with one villain, while the Spider-Man movies that are considered bad (Spider-Man 3 and Amazing Spider-Man 2) use 2 or 3 villains. So should Spider-Man movies stick with having only 1 villain per movie or do you think they could make a good movie with more then one villain?

 

[AF3619]

It's also wierd that the same movies have final swings...

 

[OriginalMiles]

So... 1 villain and a final swing is the winning formula for Spidey movies?

IMO, it depends on how the villain is used. Sure, 1 villain is easier to handle... but 2 villains could work. Think Malekith and Kurse... one's the big bad, the other is the one who does most of the fighting but there are big action scenes with Malekith too.

Say a Spidey movie had both Ock and uhm... Shocker. They team up for some reason. Spidey fights Ock a couple times (first meeting, final battle) while in between he has to fight Shocker sometimes.

Basically... the amount of villains used shouldn't matter, it's how they're used. (personally, I like the way TASM2 handled its 3 villains...)

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

No.

You can balance that **** out. Spider-Man 3 would have had Harry, Sandman, and Vulture instead of Venom. Sam still wanted Sandman to be Uncle Ben's killer and the sick daughter thing. With Vulture, it's likely he would have killed Harry. Vulture and Sandman was gonna meet up in prison and become partners there.

You can balance it out.

 

[MadVillainy]

In theory a Spider-Man film can handle multiple villains

But they havent done a good job of it in Spider-Man 3 and TASM2. I say they just focus on 1 villain for a little bit

 

[Stormz96]

The thing about multiple villains, they should be connected fluidly to the main villain in a way that just feels natural to the overall plot. No shoehorning subplots into the film because that always convolutes the thing. So I guess I'm saying, no, they shouldn't only have 1 villain if they have the right intentions and brains behind them. If Sony keeps the rights, then yes, stay with a one villain approach unless they start getting smart with things

 

[The Joker]

The problem isn't having more than one villain, it's how they handle them, and the other storylines in the movie. Other comic book movies have successfully handled multiple villains. It's not like it's beyond the realm of possibility that a Spider-Man movie can.

 

[HarryOsborn]

It's not having three villains per say, the problem is having three origin stories.

Make a few of the villains established from the get go and you save a lot of time.

 

[LEVITIKUZ]

Not going to lie. Raimi handled Venom, Sandman, and Harry well.

I mean we already knew Harry and what his motivates are thanks to the last 2 films. First shot of him was taking the Goblin stuff and going off into battle.

Sandman and Venom were the only 2 you needed backstories to.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The problem isn't having more than one villain, it's how they handle them, and the other storylines in the movie. Other comic book movies have successfully handled multiple villains. It's not like it's beyond the realm of possibility that a Spider-Man movie can.

They screwed up Lizard too and he had a film to himself. The lesson to me isn't that Spider-Man can't handle more than one villain, but that Sony is inept at creating them.

 

[Fincher]

I think the basic approach to how they handled Rhino was fine, just not the execution. He's a minor threat at the beginning, and he's there at the end for the return of Spider-Man. Because he wasn't the focus and didn't need his own special motivation and origin story, it's not necessarily any different than the normal criminals Spider-Man takes on in the other movies. Another example would be the first X-Men, where there's actually four supervillains, but three are henchmen of some kind.

Giving two or three villains their own origin stories while giving the hero his own characterization and arc is when you're probably trying to do too much. You could maybe imagine a hypothetical amazing script where everything just comes together like clockwork, but usually some/all of the elements end up rushed.

 

[Galactus123]

Only one would be the best but no more than two. The best Spider-Man movies in my opinion are Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 and they have only one villian.

 

[CaptainWagner]

There's no problem with multiple villains, as long as they are either small fights apart from the main story (i.e. Rhino or Batroc), are in a minion/mastermind situation (Malekith/Kurse) or have a good reason to teamup.

 

[degraves93]

No. Multiple villains are not a bad thing in Spider-Man films, as long as there's an established central threat (Electro), a 'behind the scenes' threat that surfaces later (Green Goblin), and a minor threat that ultimately doesn't play a role in the main story (Rhino).

 

[Frodo]

It depends as others have stated. I'd rather have a single strong villain than 3 weak ones who are there purely for fan service. That said, two villains or more can work, but the story truly has to merit it as opposed to have multiple villains to sell toys. Superman 2 has four villains , Batman Begins has several, TDK has two, X2 and XMDOFP arguably has three, etc. It depends on the execution.

Unfortunately the Batman franchise of the 90s established several troupes which have hung around in Hollywood a generation later. One of them was this idea of multiple weaker villains, with multiple back stories with very little motivation and things in common, other than to team up to stop the hero. In the end the main character is basically pushed to the background while the film is a mess. All you really need is one strong and compelling villain to challenge to hero and drive the narrative.

Green Goblin, Doc Ock, and Lizard to a lesser extent, were those compelling villains. Harry, Sandman, Electro , Venom, and Rhino, not so much. The problem is that not every villain is compelling enough to hold a film by themselves regardless of what kind of back story you give them or actor you hire.

I personally think of the villains who haven't been used, that Vulture, Chameleon, Kingpin, and Carnage could hold a film by themselves because they are ruthless, dangerous, and potentially dynamic enough for a two hour odd film.

 

[Spiderine]

Multiple villains are fine. Just depends on how you implement them into the overall story. It boils down to the writing. You can't have them upstaging one another. And you can't have them spearheading their own separate story. Each villain can be an important piece and have a specific purpose as long as there are common themes associated in the narrative of the story concerning the heroes.

Look at Captain America TWS: Brilliant how each villain in that film was used.

Batroc
Crossbones
Winter Soldier
Armin Zola
Alexander Pierce

All serves a purpose in the story. We never needed to see them all on screen with each other. But we know what motivated each one. And the Hero faced off with them at separate phases of the film. It can be done.

 

[Venom'sDad]

The problem isn't having more than one villain, it's how they handle them, and the other storylines in the movie. Other comic book movies have successfully handled multiple villains. It's not like it's beyond the realm of possibility that a Spider-Man movie can.

Multiple villains are fine. Just depends on how you implement them into the overall story. It boils down to the writing. You can't have them upstaging one another. And you can't have them spearheading their own separate story. Each villain can be an important piece and have a specific purpose as long as there are common themes associated in the narrative of the story concerning the heroes.

Look at Captain America TWS: Brilliant how each villain in that film was used.

Batroc
Crossbones
Winter Soldier
Armin Zola
Alexander Pierce

All serves a purpose in the story. We never needed to see them all on screen with each other. But we know what motivated each one. And the Hero faced off with them at separate phases of the film. It can be done.

 

[The Overlord]

So... 1 villain and a final swing is the winning formula for Spidey movies?

IMO, it depends on how the villain is used. Sure, 1 villain is easier to handle... but 2 villains could work. Think Malekith and Kurse... one's the big bad, the other is the one who does most of the fighting but there are big action scenes with Malekith too.

Say a Spidey movie had both Ock and uhm... Shocker. They team up for some reason. Spidey fights Ock a couple times (first meeting, final battle) while in between he has to fight Shocker sometimes.

Basically... the amount of villains used shouldn't matter, it's how they're used. (personally, I like the way TASM2 handled its 3 villains...)

I'm not sure the villains in Thor 2 are a good example of multiple villains in one movie done right, considering a lot of people consider Malekith the worst villain in the MCU. Malekith had very little in the way of personality and had a motive that was very ill defined, I'm not sure why he was doing things "to bring back the darkness". What would that accomplish?

If you have more then one villain and one of the villains is dull and uninteresting, you are not handling your villains correctly.

 

[PeterBenParker]

I've always liked the ideas of having one major villain and one smaller villain, and/or three smaller villains to equal one major one.

Example: (Green Goblin, Beetle)
The Enforcers (Rhino, Sandman and Shocker)

Regardless, any number of villains can work as long as the writing allows them to work.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The Dark Knight had multiple villains (Joker, Two-Face, Sal the Boss, Lau, Scarecrow) and it is the best CBM ever made.

 

[OriginalMiles]

I'm not sure the villains in Thor 2 are a good example of multiple villains in one movie done right, considering a lot of people consider Malekith the worst villain in the MCU. Malekith had very little in the way of personality and had a motive that was very ill defined, I'm not sure why he was doing things "to bring back the darkness". What would that accomplish?

If you have more then one villain and one of the villains is dull and uninteresting, you are not handling your villains correctly.

That's not at all what I meant. I wasn't talking about the character's motives, I was talking about how they were used in general. As in, main villain for bigger fight scenes (final battle, first meeting) and a side villain as an obstacle for the protagonist to fight.

That's my point.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

They can do more than one villain they just need to learn how to do it right. It not so hard if they just write their scripts better.

 

[LizardMan07]

They can do more than one villain they just need to learn how to do it right. It not so hard if they just write their scripts better.

If they follow the formula set by TASM2 they'll have more amazing films

#keepandrewgarfield

 

[Doctor Octopus]

If they follow the formula set by TASM2 they'll have more amazing films

#keepandrewgarfield

 

[spiderral]

I hate it when people use 'villain overload' as their primary reason for disliking a film.

People say that TASM2 suffers from villain overload but it's really just down to poor writing. I may get attacked for saying this but despite him being a little cheesy and over the top, I think that Rhino was the only villain in TASM2 that was used correctly.

So, as others have stated, it's all down to the writing and how the villains are used. We could easily see Spidey go up against multiple villains in the same film and still have it be a good film if the writing and direction of the film is solid.