Some plot devices I'd like to see more of...

[Chris Wallace]

1. Ordinary crime. Committed by ordinary criminals. When you've got a hero like Spider-Man or Batman, does everything that he does have to be tied to some supervillain?
2. John Q's take on the hero. Insert an extraordinary character into an otherwise ordinary world, opinions are gonna be all over the map.
3. "Subtle" homages to the comics. Just for the fun of it.
4. Hero failing. Maybe not the big fights or the big saves, but seeing that they don't always save the day makes them a little more believable.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

Hehe! Yep. You're right, Chris! And This is why Spider-man 1 and 2 are the best comic book movies ever made!

 

[Chris Wallace]

Damn-those two DID have all those things, didn't they?

 

[HR-PUFF&STUFF]

heroes teaming up to fight badguys not each other. there was a time when two heroes would meet and fight then realize that they were on the same side and team up. now they fight each other and the villains don't even factor in to it.

 

[Nightmare689]

One thing I'd like to see, is more reaction from/interaction with the city and/or world in the movie. What I mean is like how in the new batman movies, where not only would the whole setting be affected by the villains acts, but also by the hope that the hero has given them. Not only did criminals and the mob start to fear the night, but batman even had copycats, normal people standing up against crime.

Spiderman had the city folks always on his side, but they literally came out of nowhere in 1(bridge)&2(train). I dont mean it didnt make sense, because it did, but it seemed like the writers felt they only needed one scene like that, while all others were citizens speaking their good or bad feelings about spidey

and though spiderman had the good qualities mentioned above, his villians were also JUST HIS villians, not the city's. Doc Ock's invention could have done major damage, but the city didnt really notice anything other that "hey, spidermans goin after another weird bad guy that we dont know too much about besides his name and that hes a MENACE....hm....i wonder what dastardly deed that one did."

 

[Chris Wallace]

heroes teaming up to fight badguys not each other. there was a time when two heroes would meet and fight then realize that they were on the same side and team up. now they fight each other and the villains don't even factor in to it.

But that doesn't happen in the movies.

 

[Chris Wallace]

One thing I'd like to see, is more reaction from/interaction with the city and/or world in the movie. What I mean is like how in the new batman movies, where not only would the whole setting be affected by the villains acts, but also by the hope that the hero has given them. Not only did criminals and the mob start to fear the night, but batman even had copycats, normal people standing up against crime.

Spiderman had the city folks always on his side, but they literally came out of nowhere in 1(bridge)&2(train). I dont mean it didnt make sense, because it did, but it seemed like the writers felt they only needed one scene like that, while all others were citizens speaking their good or bad feelings about spidey

and though spiderman had the good qualities mentioned above, his villians were also JUST HIS villians, not the city's. Doc Ock's invention could have done major damage, but the city didnt really notice anything other that "hey, spidermans goin after another weird bad guy that we dont know too much about besides his name and that hes a MENACE....hm....i wonder what dastardly deed that one did."

I'm gonna disagree with you there. What about the two instances where the people came to Spidey's defense, knowingly putting themselves in danger against the villains they knew they couldn't possibly have a chance against?

 

[Hobgoblin]

1. Innocent people getting hurt in the crossfire during a battle. Did you ever read The Death of Jean DeWolfe? Spidey jumps over Sin Eater's shot gun blast and an old man gets hit. Thats the sort of real life thing that I want to see in a comic/action film.
2. The villain takes a random person hostage. The scene in Spider-Man 2 where Ock randomly grabs for a hostage at the bank and just happens to pick Aunt May always bugs me. There are enough co-incidences in comic movies, dont add any more.

 

[WeaponXProject]

1. Referencing situations inside the comic universe that pertains to other characters. Which was done well in TIH when the military stuff at the beginning said Stark and the Serum said S.Rogers or something. Mention a webslinger, or a motley crue of protectors. This probably has a lot to do with rights to characters in different studios but it all says Marvel.

2. Not every character is loveable and has moral and ethical issues always going on in their heads at all times. Some of them started off differently... *Ahem* Wolverine *cough cough* Stay true to the source. If the guy has a loner persona and is hard to relate to...keep it that way. If Cyclops is a leader, keep him that way, don't make him written as a hard headed side show.

3. Deliver the goods. Don't just sell the name and basterdize it. If you want to make a movie in homage to a character make your own but if you want to use a character and tame them or water it down then you probably work at Fox.

 

[Chris Wallace]

Demo & WXP-those seem to be more devices you want to see than ones you want to see more.
Villains being TRULY bad guys. Not everyone has a redeemable reason for the crap that they do. Some are just *****ebags.
Selfish villains. By this I mean, ones whose hatred of the hero is so all-consuming that they can't bear the idea of the hero going down by any hand other than their own.

 

[The Overlord]

Demo & WXP-those seem to be more devices you want to see than ones you want to see more.
Villains being TRULY bad guys. Not everyone has a redeemable reason for the crap that they do. Some are just *****ebags.
Selfish villains. By this I mean, ones whose hatred of the hero is so all-consuming that they can't bear the idea of the hero going down by any hand other than their own.

There are plenty examples of villains who are just *****ebags, most in fact: Obadiah Stane, Lex Luthor, William Stryker, Joker, Green Goblin, General Zod, Scarecrow, Abomination, Dr. Doom, Sabertooth, Venom, Bullseye, Kingpin, Jigsaw, Blackheart. I don't see how they are underrepresented.

 

[Nightmare689]

I'm gonna disagree with you there. What about the two instances where the people came to Spidey's defense, knowingly putting themselves in danger against the villains they knew they couldn't possibly have a chance against?

i put that up, but later decided to take it off from my post.
I felt that it showed everyone having mixed feelings about him, but suddenly, in that one scene(bridge in 1st, train in 2nd) everyone stood up for him and came together. Honestly, the train scene kinda worked in 2, but the scenes seem just added in to show that he was their hero and felt random, especially in the first one. i guess what i mean is that all the appreciation from the citizens seemed jammed into that one scene. I'm not attacking the movie, I'm just saying this is something i think could been added to, to create a more realistic touch to certain movies like this.

 

[Chris Wallace]

There are plenty examples of villains who are just *****ebags, most in fact: Obadiah Stane, Lex Luthor, William Stryker, Joker, Green Goblin, General Zod, Scarecrow, Abomination, Dr. Doom, Sabertooth, Venom, Bullseye, Kingpin, Jigsaw, Blackheart. I don't see how they are underrepresented.

Goblin doesn't count, IMO. He was a decent guy in the beginning of the film. So was Abomination. Had they not undergone the experiments that they did, they probably would have gone on to live productive lives.

 

[Chris Wallace]

i put that up, but later decided to take it off from my post.
I felt that it showed everyone having mixed feelings about him, but suddenly, in that one scene(bridge in 1st, train in 2nd) everyone stood up for him and came together. Honestly, the train scene kinda worked in 2, but the scenes seem just added in to show that he was their hero and felt random, especially in the first one. i guess what i mean is that all the appreciation from the citizens seemed jammed into that one scene. I'm not attacking the movie, I'm just saying this is something i think could been added to, to create a more realistic touch to certain movies like this.

1-people are fickle. Point blank. They love you one minute, hate you the next.
2-it's hard not to rally behind a guy when you actually see him risking his life to save yours, or that of a tram full of kids.

 

[The Overlord]

Goblin doesn't count, IMO. He was a decent guy in the beginning of the film. So was Abomination. Had they not undergone the experiments that they did, they probably would have gone on to live productive lives.

Highly debatable, the fact Norman ignored his own son and heaped praise on Pete makes him seem complete jerk and Emil didn't seem to concerned with the possibility of civilian deaths in the two attempts to capture Banner. Not mention Gobby crossed the moral event horizon line, which destroys all sympathy for him.

Those two were jerks before they became villains, they aren't sympathetic and that's only two examples out that very long list I provided you. All of those other villains are not sympathetic.

Really now sympathetic villains are the minority: Magneto, Mystique, Sandman (well they attempted it), Dr. Octopus, Catwoman, Harry Osborn, Phoenix, Two-Face and the Silver surfer. I don't even consider Ra's Al Ghul sympathetic, merely a Knights Templar Villain.

So I don't see how they have too many sympathetic villains.

 

[Nightmare689]

1-people are fickle. Point blank. They love you one minute, hate you the next.
2-it's hard not to rally behind a guy when you actually see him risking his life to save yours, or that of a tram full of kids.

i know, i know. the scenes just seemed a lil random to me. I guess i have Watchmen on my mind, the thought of "Are they really making a difference"

 

[Chris Wallace]

Love interests who CAN TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. Wouldn't it be awesome if the hero didn't have to worry about trying to rescue the girl while struggling to stop Armageddon or whatever? The only leading ladies I can think of who have demonstrated this trait are Karen Jensen (Blade)-come to think of it, she rescued him! And Roxanne Simpson (Ghost Rider)
And Overlord, I'll give you that Norman & Emil were jerks, maybe, but not in the same class as Doom or Kingpin.

 

[The Overlord]

Love interests who CAN TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. Wouldn't it be awesome if the hero didn't have to worry about trying to rescue the girl while struggling to stop Armageddon or whatever? The only leading ladies I can think of who have demonstrated this trait are Karen Jensen (Blade)-come to think of it, she rescued him! And Roxanne Simpson (Ghost Rider)
And Overlord, I'll give you that Norman & Emil were jerks, maybe, but not in the same class as Doom or Kingpin.

Well Pepper was never kidnapped and she did help Tony defeat Obadiah, the fact that most love interests don't have super powers limits their ability to help.

Anyway I don't see how either Emil or Norman are supposed to be sympathetic, they were both jerks before they were villains, they both volunteered for the experiments that gave them powers and they pretty crossed the moral event horizon line (at least Norman did when he tried to kill a bunch of kids.) Really now they are just jerks who gave themselves powers and became psychopaths, that's not sympathetic.

There's a difference between a villain who is sympathetic and some psychopath with a sob story who just pretends to be sympathetic.

TDK Joker pretended to sympathetic with those stories of how he got those scars, but anyone with any sense could see he is not supposed to be sympathetic, at all.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I wasn't going as far as to say they were sympathetic-although Norman did get screwed over by his own company, & the experiment did result in him becoming an MPD case. I was simply saying that they weren't as bad as Doom, who was pretty much the same with the power as he was without it.
As for the love interests, I moreso meant that they should be able to at least try to defend themselves if not score some blows against the bad guy, rather than just scream & wait to be rescued. If I'm risking my neck all the time, how seriously attracted could I be to some dingbat who just sits & tells the bad guy that I'll come & get her?

 

[The Overlord]

I wasn't going as far as to say they were sympathetic-although Norman did get screwed over by his own company, & the experiment did result in him becoming an MPD case. I was simply saying that they weren't as bad as Doom, who was pretty much the same with the power as he was without it.
As for the love interests, I moreso meant that they should be able to at least try to defend themselves if not score some blows against the bad guy, rather than just scream & wait to be rescued. If I'm risking my neck all the time, how seriously attracted could I be to some dingbat who just sits & tells the bad guy that I'll come & get her?

Well there are levels of how sympathetic and unsympathetic a villain. There are different types of villains, here's a list from TV tropes: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Villains

An Anti Villain would be the most sympathetic and a complete monster would be the least and there is a bunch of people in between. I would say very few comic book movie villains are complete monsters, TDK Joker is pretty damn close. When one thinks of sympathetic villains they think of Anti Villans, not people who are somewhat more likable then complete mosnters.

The problem with movie doom is, not only does he lack some of the more noble qualities of 616 Doom, he lacks the style cunning and epiciness of his 616 counterpart. 616 Doom was a grand, epic Magnificent Bastard, movie Doom was a base and slimey smug snake.

Anyway I think only MJ and Lois Lane were completely useless love interests, like I said Pepper was never caputred and she at least helped defeat Obadiah. Likewise Rachael in the batman movies attacked the villains now and again.

Edit: Actually Lois punched a depowered Ursa into a pit, screw it, only MJ is completely useless.

 

[Chris Wallace]

The killing of the Kryptonians was completely gratuitous, (adding to the widely anti-climactic feeling of that movie's ending; and I knew somebody would bring that up eventually) & MJ did try to attack Ock w/a two-by-four, and drop a cinder block on Venom's head. Now Vicki Vale-SHE was completely useless. Chase Meridian-sure, she got a few licks in, but when Bruce got shot she reverted to damsel in distress mode. Not to mention her whole "Two-Face's coin can be exploited"-Really? No! And kissing Batman in the middle of a fight? Now if he was to get shot in the head while she had him distracted she would've felt pretty stupid.

 

[The Overlord]

The killing of the Kryptonians was completely gratuitous, (adding to the widely anti-climactic feeling of that movie's ending; and I knew somebody would bring that up eventually) & MJ did try to attack Ock w/a two-by-four, and drop a cinder block on Venom's head. Now Vicki Vale-SHE was completely useless. Chase Meridian-sure, she got a few licks in, but when Bruce got shot she reverted to damsel in distress mode. Not to mention her whole "Two-Face's coin can be exploited"-Really? No! And kissing Batman in the middle of a fight? Now if he was to get shot in the head while she had him distracted she would've felt pretty stupid.

Meh I didn't have a problem with that part of the Superman movie.

Well in the Batman mythos, love interests aren't really that important, unless they are also villains, so its not surprising the love interests are useless and uninteresting. They don't have key roles in the mythos like MJ or Lois Lane does. I would say most love interests are at least somewhat useful.

Anyway when you say you want unsympathetic villains, how unsympathetic do you mean? There villains who are somewhat unsympathetic, villains who are unsympathetic who but are stylish and classy and villains who are so monstrously evil they are not sympathetic at all.

 

[Chris Wallace]

I would just like to see a few more evil monsters. But that's if & only if they're evil monsters in the comics.

 

[The Overlord]

I would just like to see a few more evil monsters. But that's if & only if they're evil monsters in the comics.

Well again not everyone has complete monsters in their rogues galleries. Though it did seem that William Stryker was somewhat less evil in the movies then the comics, but he was still very unlikable in the movies.

I liked Dr. Octopus being an anti villain in the movie, because he has gotten plenty of pet the dog moments since the 80s, ditto with Sandman who is often an Anti Villain in the comics, though the execution is a bit off in the movie with him. With Sadman the cocnept was sound, but the execution fell flat.

Joker in TDK was pretty damn close to being a complete monster though, he is not sympathetic at all. Also when Red Skull appears in the Cap movie, he will have to be completely evil. Bullseye had a personality close to his comic book counterpart, he seemed like a complete monster.

I'm more unhappy that both Doom and Lex were not Magnificent Bastards in the movies, they are epic schemers in the comics and in the movies they fall way short. Movie Doom is just some base, creepy smug snake and Lex was a cackling card carrying villain. We need more Magnificent Bastards in these movies.

 

[3dman27]

Love interests who CAN TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. Wouldn't it be awesome if the hero didn't have to worry about trying to rescue the girl while struggling to stop Armageddon or whatever? /QUOTE]
yes indeed