Villain Poll

[Willie Lumpkin]

Mole Man needs to appear for more than just at the last 15 minutes. He needs to be developed throughout the movie so we know why he's doing what he does and who he is as a person so we can connect with him. Also, regardless of the true identity of the villains being revealed until the end, they were still in the movie(not last 15 mins) and got room to be developed and be known to the audience. The shark in JAWS is not a person and therefore didn't really need to be explored or developed... there's not really much depth to a bloodthirsty shark.

Mole Man is the type of villain that needs to be humanized because he's a human who feels very real and understandable emotions of anger and loneliness for being treated as an outcast and freak. He's the type of villain that the audience can relate to. Someone like Annihilus, however, is not.

I respectfully disagree. I think he should scare the crap out of the viewer for the first 80% of the film and then, near the end, we can find out more about him.

That's classic science fiction technique. Often science fiction stories start with a grave threat that causes drama and concern and then, by the end, it's revealed that the antagonist is misunderstood or for some other reason isn't as big a threat as originally thought. That concept was used many many times by Jack Kirby and Stan Lee themselves - Dragon Man, Infant Terrible, Impossible man, etc. . . . and, to some extent, they did that with Mole-man also.

I think that would work very well with the Mole-man and the reveal at the end could be a classic film moment if done right. Why does the audience need to relate to him from the start? He's the bad guy. We don't want people rooting for him.

In future films, he could have a more ambiguous role, but I think it would be missing a great story-telling opportunity to not to surround him with mystery in the first film.

 

[DigificWriter]

I mentioned this in another thread, but if FOX is serious about intermingling it's FF and X-Men franchises, the most organic way to do it is to mix the source material and cross-pollinate things by using X-Men villains to compensate for the relative weak rogues gallery for the FF. It would be all kinds of awesome to see the new filmic iteration of the Four fight somebody like, say, Mr. Sinister or even Apocalypse; you could even toss in one of the X-Men's human adversaries as well.

You could even use the Shi'ar as FF antagonists and tie them to Galactus and the Silver Surfer.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

I respectfully disagree. I think he should scare the crap out of the viewer for the first 80% of the film and then, near the end, we can find out more about him.

That's classic science fiction technique. Often science fiction stories start with a grave threat that causes drama and concern and then, by the end, it's revealed that the antagonist is misunderstood or for some other reason isn't as big a threat as originally thought. That concept was used many many times by Jack Kirby and Stan Lee themselves - Dragon Man, Infant Terrible, Impossible man, etc. . . . and, to some extent, they did that with Mole-man also.

I think that would work very well with the Mole-man and the reveal at the end could be a classic film moment if done right. Why does the audience need to relate to him from the start? He's the bad guy. We don't want people rooting for him.

In future films, he could have a more ambiguous role, but I think it would be missing a great story-telling opportunity to not to surround him with mystery in the first film.

Just because he's a bad guy does not mean that people shouldn't be able to connect to him. It's the type of bad guy that he is, which is a sympathetic one. I'd understand if you were talking about Annihilus, or even Doom to a certain extent, but Mole Man has always been a sympathetic villain(although not always done well, but sympathetic nonetheless), and he should stay one. I also don't want to see him in future films unless it's for good reason.

Sympathetic villains don't have people rooting for them, they just have people caring about them(to an extent) and understanding why they're doing what they're doing. Think Loki from Thor.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I mentioned this in another thread, but if FOX is serious about intermingling it's FF and X-Men franchises, the most organic way to do it is to mix the source material and cross-pollinate things by using X-Men villains to compensate for the relative weak rogues gallery for the FF. It would be all kinds of awesome to see the new filmic iteration of the Four fight somebody like, say, Mr. Sinister or even Apocalypse; you could even toss in one of the X-Men's human adversaries as well.

You could even use the Shi'ar as FF antagonists and tie them to Galactus and the Silver Surfer.

Nonononono.... You can say its relatively weak, but the truth is. We are talking about some of the MU's greatest villains. Like, my god. Doom and Galactus deserve to be done justice. And all the alien races?

Look at Iron Man, he has (imo) probably the worst rogues gallery for his popularity. And they managed to make 2 solid films so far, with plenty of villainy. And they havent even used his arch nemesis. :]

F4 will be fine for a trilogy without the assistance of the X-Verse. Let it happen! One good Fantastic 4 movie. Thats all we're asking!

 

[DigificWriter]

^ Name one FF villain outside of Doom, Galactus, and the Surfer who both comic fans and general audiences could take seriously as a threat.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

^ Name one FF villain outside of Doom, Galactus, and the Surfer who both comic fans and general audiences could take seriously as a threat.

Annihilus.

Mole Man if done correctly.

 

[DigificWriter]

Does FOX have the rights to Annihilus?

Even if you're able to find a way to do Mole Man and not make him a parody, general audiences aren't going to take him seriously as a top-tier threat to the Fantastic Four.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Does FOX have the rights to Annihilus?

Even if you're able to find a way to do Mole Man and not make him a parody, general audiences aren't going to take him seriously as a top-tier threat to the Fantastic Four.

Yeah, think so.

And says you. So many people on here say how hard it is to have Mole Man as a serious villain... just because you can't find a way that it would be possible, doesn't mean the actual writers and director can't. I guarantee that Mole Man can be taken seriously as a threat. Don't look at the comics he's been in. Use your head. A man spawning gigantic and murderous monsters that come up from the ground(also perfect for surprise attacks)? How can you not take him as a threat?

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

^ Name one FF villain outside of Doom, Galactus, and the Surfer who both comic fans and general audiences could take seriously as a threat.

Besides Annihilus, the Skrulls and the Kree namely. Super Skrull included.

Mad Thinker could also be done some serious justice.

a Giganto type monster would be awesome to see on screen. Assuming they are allowed to use him.

 

[TheHeatKitchen]

The Mole Man idea is really starting to grow on me.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Besides Annihilus, the Skrulls and the Kree namely. Super Skrull included.

Mad Thinker could also be done some serious justice.

a Giganto type monster would be awesome to see on screen. Assuming they are allowed to use him.

Mad Thinker would be cool to see.

It's funny you use the name "Giganto" when you weren't even referring to Mole Man, since that was the name of one of his monsters in the first issue.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

The Mole Man idea is really starting to grow on me.

Not only does he offer huge monsters for the FF to take on, he also offers interesting places for them to explore with Monster Island and all of Subterranea. Those would be so much fun to actually explore along with the FF.

Plus, if Fox is going the 3D route(which they will), gigantic monsters and breathtaking environments would be perfect.

 

[The Overlord]

Just because he's a bad guy does not mean that people shouldn't be able to connect to him. It's the type of bad guy that he is, which is a sympathetic one. I'd understand if you were talking about Annihilus, or even Doom to a certain extent, but Mole Man has always been a sympathetic villain(although not always done well, but sympathetic nonetheless), and he should stay one. I also don't want to see him in future films unless it's for good reason.

Sympathetic villains don't have people rooting for them, they just have people caring about them(to an extent) and understanding why they're doing what they're doing. Think Loki from Thor.

Problem is, I never found Mole Man very sympathetic in the 616 comics. He seemed like a whiner instead of a truly tragic villain. I never cared about his plight, because he never seemed proactive enough in dealing with the problems of his life and his problems seem trivial compared to what other villains have faced. To me a good sympathetic villain is someone who could have been a good person, but has his life destroyed by circumstances beyond his control.

With Mole Man, we get a guy who comes off as a spoiled child who is mad that everything is not going his way, that is not sympathetic. Its not really scary either, unless you take it in a dark direction. In his back story he is mad because he is hitting on random bimbos and they are turning him down. Why doesn't he just try to hit on women are more in his league? Not everyone in the world is going to get to date a super model, often you have to settle in life. None of the women who reject him are well developed enough for me to care about, so I don't see why I should care about them or them in relation to Mole Man. Heck that this point Mole Man could try online dating or something.

Also Mole Man got fired by his boss for being ugly, to me that doesn't work as a plot point, because Mole Man can just sue his boss or threaten to sue his boss if that happened today.

Let's compare Mole man to other villains, Dr. Doom is messed up because his mother sold her soul to devil and was burned at the stake, his father was killed by the country's dictator and his face was blown up when he tried to contact his mother in bad place. Or look at Magneto, he lost his family in the Holocaust, that makes Mole Man problems seem trivial in comparison. So instead of being sympathetic, Mole Man comes off as a whiner to me and that is not what you want in a villain. For most part Mole Man's back story, is too underdeveloped to be compelling, only the real character focused story about Mole Man I even remotely liked, was one written by Mark Waid in the pages of Daredevil, but that is a really DD related story.

Heck I think I like Ultimate Mole Man better then 616 Mole man, because Mole Man had a better reason for revenge against a particular party, rather then "society" and he had a creepy obsession with Sue which made him a bit more sinister.

I respectfully disagree. I think he should scare the crap out of the viewer for the first 80% of the film and then, near the end, we can find out more about him.

That's classic science fiction technique. Often science fiction stories start with a grave threat that causes drama and concern and then, by the end, it's revealed that the antagonist is misunderstood or for some other reason isn't as big a threat as originally thought. That concept was used many many times by Jack Kirby and Stan Lee themselves - Dragon Man, Infant Terrible, Impossible man, etc. . . . and, to some extent, they did that with Mole-man also.

I think that would work very well with the Mole-man and the reveal at the end could be a classic film moment if done right. Why does the audience need to relate to him from the start? He's the bad guy. We don't want people rooting for him.

In future films, he could have a more ambiguous role, but I think it would be missing a great story-telling opportunity to not to surround him with mystery in the first film.

I don't think that would work in a movie though. If Mole Man is the shadows for the entire, the audience is expecting something. If you have all this buildup and in the end he is just some fat little guy in a green cloak with a stick, who the audience never saw before, will be a real disappointment. Frankly Mole Man's design is not scary in the slightest and its a bit naive to expect today's somewhat jaded audience to scared of a little fat man in a green cloak. In Dark Knight Rises, the villain was always in the movie, she just didn't reveal herself till the climax, that's what made her effective, she wasn't some stranger the audience never saw before coming out of nowhere. With Jaws, Jaws was presented as a monstrous killing machine, so the build up had a pay off when saw him in person, that doesn't work with Mole Man, because giant shark is scarier then fat little man. If Mole Man is in the shadows the whole time, there has to be a good reason for it, otherwise it will be a huge disappointment to the audience and ruin the climax to the film. Today's audience won't find Mole Man terrifying by just having him in the shadows for most of the film, that won't work, it will seem annoying rather frightening. Him being in shadows for a bit could be effective, but not the whole film, that just get annoying pretty fast.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Problem is, I never found Mole Man very sympathetic in the 616 comics. He seemed like a whiner instead of a truly tragic villain. I never cared about his plight, because he never seemed proactive enough in dealing with the problems of his life and his problems seem trivial compared to what other villains have faced. To me a good sympathetic villain is someone who could have been a good person, but has his life destroyed by circumstances beyond his control.

With Mole Man, we get a guy who comes off as a spoiled child who is mad that everything is not going his way, that is not sympathetic. Its not really scary either, unless you take it in a dark direction. In his back story he is mad because he is hitting on random bimbos and they are turning him down. Why doesn't he just try to hit on women are more in his league? Not everyone in the world is going to get to date a super model, often you have to settle in life. None of the women who reject him are well developed enough for me to care about, so I don't see why I should care about them or them in relation to Mole Man. Heck that this point Mole Man could try online dating or something.

Also Mole Man got fired by his boss for being ugly, to me that doesn't work as a plot point, because Mole Man can just sue his boss or threaten to sue his boss if that happened today.

Let's compare Mole man to other villains, Dr. Doom is messed up because his mother sold her soul to devil and was burned at the stake, his father was killed by the country's dictator and his face was blown up when he tried to contact his mother in bad place. Or look at Magneto, he lost his family in the Holocaust, that makes Mole Man problems seem trivial in comparison. So instead of being sympathetic, Mole Man comes off as a whiner to me and that is not what you want in a villain. For most part Mole Man's back story, is too underdeveloped to be compelling, only the real character focused story about Mole Man I even remotely liked, was one written by Mark Waid in the pages of Daredevil, but that is a really DD related story.

Heck I think I like Ultimate Mole Man better then 616 Mole man, because Mole Man had a better reason for revenge against a particular party, rather then "society" and he had a creepy obsession with Sue which made him a bit more sinister.

Like I said, Mole Man is meant to be a sympathetic villain, despite not always being done well in the comics. The way Mole Man looks is beyond his control, and he's a brilliant scientist that's just had a hard and lonely life. Of course he could have been a good person, but it's his life experiences that have made him feel hatred for us. You're constantly referring to the comics, but that most likely won't be the reason he gets fired(if he does at all) in the movie.

Doom may have had it rough, but he's barely a sympathetic villain compared to someone like Mole Man. Magneto is sympathetic and that's a perfect example, however, that doesn't change the fact that Mole Man is still a sympathetic villain. If he's in a movie, you can bet that his problems won't come off as "whining". Did you see Chronicle, another movie directed by Trank? In the movie, Andrew was constantly picked on and treated like dirt by most of the other kids and his father as well. When he finally turned evil, the audience sympathized with him because they had seen what he'd gone through and saw him as a fleshed out person. The same can be done with Mole Man, but I guess you need proof before you believe that.

 

[psylockolussus]

I'm not familiar with Fantastic Four villains but I would like to see the villains besides Dr. Doom and Galactus.

 

[The Overlord]

Like I said, Mole Man is meant to be a sympathetic villain, despite not always being done well in the comics. The way Mole Man looks is beyond his control, and he's a brilliant scientist that's just had a hard and lonely life. Of course he could have been a good person, but it's his life experiences that have made him feel hatred for us. You're constantly referring to the comics, but that most likely won't be the reason he gets fired(if he does at all) in the movie.

Mole Man being "ugly" is not nearly enough for me to find him sympathetic, there are lots ugly people in real life who perfectly normal lives and they do that by getting together with other ugly people, they lower their standards, they settle. Has Mole Man ever tried lower this standards and just settling for some ugly woman? Is Mole Man's life crappy because he is ugly or because he is not proactive enough and settling? Plus Mole Man in the comics is just homely, not circus freak ugly, so its hard to buy that he that he is shunned by everyone in society. Lots of ugly people just live with the reality of their situation, Mole Man becoming a super villain just because of that seems shallow.

Doom may have had it rough, but he's barely a sympathetic villain compared to someone like Mole Man. Magneto is sympathetic and that's a perfect example, however, that doesn't change the fact that Mole Man is still a sympathetic villain. If he's in a movie, you can bet that his problems won't come off as "whining". Did you see Chronicle, another movie directed by Trank? In the movie, Andrew was constantly picked on and treated like dirt by most of the other kids and his father as well. When he finally turned evil, the audience sympathized with him because they had seen what he'd gone through and saw him as a fleshed out person. The same can be done with Mole Man, but I guess you need proof before you believe that.

Have not seen that movie, but isn't Andrew a kid? Mole Man is an adult, so you expect different things from an adult vs. a kid. Kids are more likely to be cruel to an ugly kid, with an adult, other adults more likely to mind their own business and not bother said ugly person and adults are more likely to have a thicker skin. You talk about Andrew's dad, we know nothing about Mole Man's dad, so the comparison doesn't work. We don't know enough about Mole Man to feel for him, why don't know anything about his parents or other family. In his back story in the comics doesn't have enough dramatic moments of cruelty in it, if Mole Man had been married to gold digger, who made him believe that she truly loved him, but then leaves him for the nearest pool boy and takes all his money, that is more effective in making Mole Man tragic then having random bimbos turn him down.

The way Mole Man's back story is presented in the 616 comics, it seems like Mole Man's problems would go away if he manned up and just started dating a ugly girl. A villain is not sympathetic, if they can change their lives by being proactive and chooses not be, then they are author of their own misfortunes. In the 616 comics, Mole Man just seems shallow, hitting on girls out of his league for mere lust, rather then true feelings of love, that is not sympathetic. 616 Mole Man's origin is not meaty enough to be interesting. That is why I think Ultimate Mole Man is an improvement, not a huge improvement, but its step in the right direction. I think the idea Mole Man being ugly is reason enough for him to become a super villain, is a rather silly and outdated notion and kinda of offensive, when you think of how many perfectly nice ugly people are out there. He needs more of a developed motive then "I'm ugly", something with more meat on it.

Dr. Doom seems more sympathetic to me, but because he has dealt a worse hand in life then Mole Man. Mole Man is just homely, he never grew up in a dictatorship, lost both his parents in tragic circumstances and had his face blown up. I think Dr. Doom has a had a worse life then Mole Man, Mole Man's back story just not well developed enough to be tragic, it doesn't answer enough questions, it doesn't give nearly enough insight, it makes Mole Man seem shallow and not proactive enough.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Mole Man being "ugly" is not nearly enough for me to find him sympathetic, there are lots ugly people in real life who perfectly normal lives and they do that by getting together with other ugly people, they lower their standards, they settle. Has Mole Man ever tried lower this standards and just settling for some ugly woman? Is Mole Man's life crappy because he is ugly or because he is not proactive enough and settling? Plus Mole Man in the comics is just homely, not circus freak ugly, so its hard to buy that he that he is shunned by everyone in society. Lots of ugly people just live with the reality of their situation, Mole Man becoming a super villain just because of that seems shallow.



Have not seen that movie, but isn't Andrew a kid? Mole Man is an adult, so you expect different things from an adult vs. a kid. Kids are more likely to be cruel to an ugly kid, with an adult, other adults more likely to mind their own business and not bother said ugly person and adults are more likely to have a thicker skin. You talk about Andrew's dad, we know nothing about Mole Man's dad, so the comparison doesn't work. We don't know enough about Mole Man to feel for him, why don't know anything about his parents or other family. In his back story in the comics doesn't have enough dramatic moments of cruelty in it, if Mole Man had been married to gold digger, who made him believe that she truly loved him, but then leaves him for the nearest pool boy and takes all his money, that is more effective in making Mole Man tragic then having random bimbos turn him down.

The way Mole Man's back story is presented in the 616 comics, it seems like Mole Man's problems would go away if he manned up and just started dating a ugly girl. A villain is not sympathetic, if they can change their lives by being proactive and chooses not be, then they are author of their own misfortunes. In the 616 comics, Mole Man just seems shallow, hitting on girls out of his league for mere lust, rather then true feelings of love, that is not sympathetic. 616 Mole Man's origin is not meaty enough to be interesting. That is why I think Ultimate Mole Man is an improvement, not a huge improvement, but its step in the right direction. I think the idea Mole Man being ugly is reason enough for him to become a super villain, is a rather silly and outdated notion and kinda of offensive, when you think of how many perfectly nice ugly people are out there. He needs more of a developed motive then "I'm ugly", something with more meat on it.

Dr. Doom seems more sympathetic to me, but because he has dealt a worse hand in life then Mole Man. Mole Man is just homely, he never grew up in a dictatorship, lost both his parents in tragic circumstances and had his face blown up. I think Dr. Doom has a had a worse life then Mole Man, Mole Man's back story just not well developed enough to be tragic, it doesn't answer enough questions, it doesn't give nearly enough insight, it makes Mole Man seem shallow and not proactive enough.

Regardless of Mole Man being an adult now, he started out as a kid just like Andrew. If Andrew wouldn't have been killed, then he would have grown up to be just like Mole Man and his reasons for being a villain would still be understandable because we've seen what he's gone through.

If Mole Man were in the movie, they'd most likely give him some real deformities and not just make him "homely".

This is someone who is truly deformed. You can't just use the excuse like, "Well, can't he just find a woman?". It's not always that easy, especially when you look like he does(skin disease, boils, etc.). It's not because he's ugly that he's a villain.

It's because of how he's been treated and left completely alone because of his ugliness that makes him feel such hatred. Stop going by the 616 comics, because no marvel/dc cbm has ever fully adapted 616. It's mostly always a mixture of 616, Ultimate, and the writer's/director's influence that molds these characters. If Mole Man were the villain in an FF movie, he'd be made into someone more fleshed out, sympathetic and, ultimately, dangerous. Trank will see to that, because he's achieved it before with flying colors. But like I said, I guess you need actual proof.

 

[bubbadoom]

Of course Mole Man would be fleshed out in the movie - just like Whiplash was - or just about any other comic book movie villain.

If I understand the "Ultimate" version, he was an instructor at the school the FF went to or some such nonsense. My problem with this is that the more villains that have this type of one on one connection with the FF, the more it dilutes the Richards/Doom relationship. Let's save this special coincidence for just Reed and Victor.

Also the entire idea of the Baxter Foundation or what ever is just lame - another aspect of the "Ultimate" FF that was not.

 

[The Overlord]

Regardless of Mole Man being an adult now, he started out as a kid just like Andrew. If Andrew wouldn't have been killed, then he would have grown up to be just like Mole Man and his reasons for being a villain would still be understandable because we've seen what he's gone through.

If Mole Man were in the movie, they'd most likely give him some real deformities and not just make him "homely".

This is someone who is truly deformed. You can't just use the excuse like, "Well, can't he just find a woman?". It's not always that easy, especially when you look like he does(skin disease, boils, etc.). It's not because he's ugly that he's a villain.

It's because of how he's been treated and left completely alone because of his ugliness that makes him feel such hatred. Stop going by the 616 comics, because no marvel/dc cbm has ever fully adapted 616. It's mostly always a mixture of 616, Ultimate, and the writer's/director's influence that molds these characters. If Mole Man were the villain in an FF movie, he'd be made into someone more fleshed out, sympathetic and, ultimately, dangerous. Trank will see to that, because he's achieved it before with flying colors. But like I said, I guess you need actual proof.

Well those are pictures of Ultimate Mole Man, who is more ugly then 616 Mole Man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mole_man.jpg

If they use Mole Man in a movie, they should use the Ultimate Mole Man, mainly because he had better motives and a more defined personality. First Ultimate Mole Man is more ugly then 616 Mole Man. Second, in the Ultimate Universe, he shunned because of his looks, but in a more realistic way, he still respected for his intelligence. The straw that broke the camel's back, is Mole Man used funds and equipment from the government agency that he was working for to create artificial life, so the agency fired him, took his funding and his research. That is what made him lose his mind, so he had a more defined reason for wanting revenge on a particular party.

Mole Man's ugliness can part of his motive, but there should be some other stuff that makes him go around the bend, not just that. He also had an obsession with Sue, which makes Mole Man more creepy and gives him a better dynamic with the FF in general, a personal connection that isn't about a shared past.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Of course Mole Man would be fleshed out in the movie - just like Whiplash was - or just about any other comic book movie villain.

If I understand the "Ultimate" version, he was an instructor at the school the FF went to or some such nonsense. My problem with this is that the more villains that have this type of one on one connection with the FF, the more it dilutes the Richards/Doom relationship. Let's save this special coincidence for just Reed and Victor.

Also the entire idea of the Baxter Foundation or what ever is just lame - another aspect of the "Ultimate" FF that was not.

I actually would be okay if Mole Man worked under Reed in some sort of facility(Before Baxter Building). He then gets fired by some higher-ups for his twisted creations and abominations, then gets his research taken from him by them. Reed would know about this and would reluctantly agree with the higher-ups that Mole Man should be fired for his monstrosities, and that would give Mole Man a vendetta with Reed(feeling betrayed by his colleague) and the rest of society.

Well those are pictures of Ultimate Mole Man, who is more ugly then 616 Mole Man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mole_man.jpg

If they use Mole Man in a movie, they should use the Ultimate Mole Man, mainly because he had better motives and a more defined personality. First Ultimate Mole Man is more ugly then 616 Mole Man. Second, in the Ultimate Universe, he shunned because of his looks, but in a more realistic way, he still respected for his intelligence. The straw that broke the camel's back, is Mole Man used funds and equipment from the government agency that he was working for to create artificial life, so the agency fired him, took his funding and his research. That is what made him lose his mind, so he had a more defined reason for wanting revenge on a particular party.

Mole Man's ugliness can part of his motive, but there should be some other stuff that makes him go around the bend, not just that. He also had an obsession with Sue, which makes Mole Man more creepy and gives him a better dynamic with the FF in general, a personal connection that isn't about a shared past.

Oh yeah, I know that's Ultimate Mole Man. That's what I typed into google images, so I could find pics of him truly deformed. I agree, they should use Ultimate Mole Man's motivation for becoming a villain, along with his deformities and loneliness.

 

[The Overlord]

Of course Mole Man would be fleshed out in the movie - just like Whiplash was - or just about any other comic book movie villain.

If I understand the "Ultimate" version, he was an instructor at the school the FF went to or some such nonsense. My problem with this is that the more villains that have this type of one on one connection with the FF, the more it dilutes the Richards/Doom relationship. Let's save this special coincidence for just Reed and Victor.

Also the entire idea of the Baxter Foundation or what ever is just lame - another aspect of the "Ultimate" FF that was not.

Was Whiplash really that great of a comic book movie villain? He was okay, but even the actor who played him had no love for him and he did nothing for the large part of the movie, he is not reall they banner that other comic book movie villains should be measured against.

The problem is if the FF are fighting Mole Man if the FF is just fighting him because he is the villain and Mole Man is fighting the FF just because the movie needs a villain, there conflict will be bland and uninteresting to the audience, they need some dynamic, some chemistry as foes.

Now the FF don't have study under Mole Man, Mole Man could simply be a scientist working at a government department with no connection to the FF before he gets fired for using government resources to create artificial life. Perhaps Mole Man is simply a fan of Reed Richards before becoming a villain, giving him a reason to study Reed's work. If Reed is supposed to be greatest scientific geniuses alive and Mole Man works as a scientist, it makes sense. But frankly Mole Man using government funds for his own purposes and getting fired, losing research, gives him a stronger motive for revenge then he has in the 616 comics. Mole Man's motives in the 616 comics are really flimsy, IMO. He is not a very well defined or compelling character in the 616 universe, which is a problem, I don't find conflicts between Mole Man and the FF interesting in the 616 comics, because Mole Man comes off as one note villain without a lot of depth or pathos, with rushed and underdeveloped origin.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Which is why they won't use the 616 version... he sucks.

 

[bubbadoom]

Was Whiplash really that great of a comic book movie villain? He was okay, but even the actor who played him had no love for him and he did nothing for the large part of the movie, he is not reall they banner that other comic book movie villains should be measured against.

The problem is if the FF are fighting Mole Man if the FF is just fighting him because he is the villain and Mole Man is fighting the FF just because the movie needs a villain, there conflict will be bland and uninteresting to the audience, they need some dynamic, some chemistry as foes.

Now the FF don't have study under Mole Man, Mole Man could simply be a scientist working at a government department with no connection to the FF before he gets fired for using government resources to create artificial life. Perhaps Mole Man is simply a fan of Reed Richards before becoming a villain, giving him a reason to study Reed's work. If Reed is supposed to be greatest scientific geniuses alive and Mole Man works as a scientist, it makes sense. But frankly Mole Man using government funds for his own purposes and getting fired, losing research, gives him a stronger motive for revenge then he has in the 616 comics. Mole Man's motives in the 616 comics are really flimsy, IMO. He is not a very well defined or compelling character in the 616 universe, which is a problem, I don't find conflicts between Mole Man and the FF interesting in the 616 comics, because Mole Man comes off as one note villain without a lot of depth or pathos, with rushed and underdeveloped origin.

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but why does their need to be this connection? Some time the villain IS a bad guy who needs to be stopped.

Did Bond have a personal connection with Dr. No, Goldfinger, The Man with the Golden Gun?

Were Churchill and Hitler old college buddies?

The FF ARE in the business of stopping bad guys - who ever they may be - not just ones who happen to have an odd connection to them.

Linking Sandman in with Parker in SM3 made that SO much better, didn't it...?

And does anyone really give a crap what Mickey Rourke thought of Whiplash?

 

[The Overlord]

I am not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but why does their need to be this connection? Some time the villain IS a bad guy who needs to be stopped.

Did Bond have a personal connection with Dr. No, Goldfinger, The Man with the Golden Gun?

Were Churchill and Hitler old college buddies?

The FF ARE in the business of stopping bad guys - who ever they may be - not just ones who happen to have an odd connection to them.

Linking Sandman in with Parker in SM3 made that SO much better, didn't it...??

You are ignoring a big part of my post, I said Mole Man didn't have to be working with the FF before becoming a super villain, he can be working for some government agency and uses their resources to create artificial life, then gets fired by said agency and begins to organize attacks on the government, you don't need to involve the FF till later. Ultimate Mole Man just has better reason for wanting revenge on a particular party, while 616 Mole Man's supposed reasons for revenge are far more underdeveloped and not very interesting, he doesn't seem to have a particular target he wants revenge on.

Mole Man needs something that makes him compelling, he shouldn't just be a villain because the movie needs a villain, that is just dull. He doesn't need a back story with the FF, but he needs an interesting back story.

And does anyone really give a crap what Mickey Rourke thought of Whiplash?

But does anyone really care about Whiplash, he was just an okay bad guy, not a great one. Iron Man 2 was an okay movie, its not really an example to be followed.

 

[bubbadoom]

The only reason that I mention Whiplash is that he is a good example of Marvel taking a so-so villain and fleshing him out into a serviceable one for a movie - he served his purpose just fine in IM2 - which is not as bad as some around here like to make it out to be - after the two attempts by Fox, I would be happy if we got an FF movie that good.

Wasn't the Mole Man's back story fleshed out in the Marvel Universe mini-series in the '90's. I seem to recall in that series that he was ridiculed more for his theories of underworld civilizations and creatures than his looks. His disappearance had more to do with his being "lost" in his search for this underworld and not just hiding because he was ugly.
That "Ultimate" back story of creating artificial life seems to be nudging him too close to the Mad Thinker and even Diablo's m.o. for my tastes - the Thinker had a thing for Androids, and Diablo's alchemy brought the artificial creation of Dragon Man to life.
Just because it says "Ultimate" on the cover does not make it so...