The Amazing Spider-Man 2 What villain would you like to see in Amazing Spider-man 2?

[Doc Ock]

what if he burned accidentally someone really bad and then he considers himself a monster ,different ,so he starts thinking like he is a superior species and believes himself some kind of god

Reminds me of the plotline of Spider-Man 2: Enter Electro on PS1.

 

[AF3619]

maybe he is just a guy working for Oscorp, kinda Spectacular Spiderman(cartoon) route then he gets this accident , he gets exited(instead of terrified) but then he burns someone close to him really bad and people start to fear him , so he becomes "Electro"

 

[Ultimatehero]

Not enough depth behind it. Only way that would work is if he was a sociopath to begin with. If you hurt someone, got scared, and people started calling you monster it would lead to depression. However if people started fearing you for no reason, you'd become angry and maybe even vengeful initially out of a need of self protection. Hurting/killing someone accidentally would be best used as the final straw that drives him insane.

ADDING: basically in my mind by the end I see him as being the cackling eccentric beyond insane villain that is on the brink.

 

[Anno_Domini]

what if he burned accidentally someone really bad and then he considers himself a monster ,different ,so he starts thinking like he is a superior species and believes himself some kind of god

Electro believing him to be like an apex predator? Hrmmm, maybe.

 

[Still Wynning]

Electro believing him to be like an apex predator? Hrmmm, maybe.

So, basically like Andrew from Chronicle.

 

[Anno_Domini]

So, basically like Andrew from Chronicle.

If you need a comparison, sure, but Chronicle only gave Andrew that title for like the last twenty minutes, or maybe that is even being generous whereas TAS-M 2 could very well develop this were we're given a villain with a God-like complex and superiority issues where Electro believes he's the apex predator for a rather long duration. I could see Maxwell Dillon having that complex as soon as he becomes Electro.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Same here, but don't get your hopes up, guys. Avi Arad still has the mentality that every villain is better if attached to the hero in some way.

That thought is annoying, he needs to update his way of thinking

I always assumed it was Raimi who was the one who wanted every villain to be connected to Peter Parker.

He was in charge of the 90s cartoon
Doc Ock: Was Peter's science teacher when Pete was a child
Kingpin: Was saved by Peter, later owed him a favor but betrayed him, then paid for his wedding
Hobgoblin: Was an acquaintance at least, and challenged him in the love of Felicia
Morbius: Colleague, and turned Vampire cause he was affected by Peter's blood he stole
Chameleon: Old foe of Peter's parents
Hydroman: Knew MJ from high school, that cause Peter more troubles after marrying MJ's hydroclone
Kraven: The love interest of a close friend, problem when he's mad
Tombstone: Well, his story didn't change much from comics, so he shouldn't really count

But you know, there were signs displaying that mentality of Avi behind the villains being attached

 

[Spider-Ranger]

I totally forgot about Tombstone being a part of the 90s cartoon

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Best thing about him is adding to the story of Robbie

 

[TheAQU4M4N]

If goby isn't in he second one we need a villain who hasn't been used in the film medium yet like mysterio, chameleon, Kraven, or scorpion.

 

[©KAW]

Same here, but don't get your hopes up, guys. Avi Arad still has the mentality that every villain is better if attached to the hero in some way.

This is so freakin' true, why must his tiny brain think like that?

I thought Avi Arad had his own production company and was leaving his producing duties to produce his own films, what the hell happened, I thought we were finally going to get rid of him.

Son-of-b---- is probably healthy as an ox too...

 

[Spider-Aziz]

If goby isn't in he second one we need a villain who hasn't been used in the film medium yet like mysterio, chameleon, Kraven, or scorpion.

Scorpion was used in the game, so I hope they don't ignore that and tell gamers "F*** the game" just like that, it will be mean

 

[Spiderdevil]

Gotta say, this is one bit of news that actually excites me for the sequel. While Shocker was always my first choice as a villain, Electro was my second option and if TAS-M 2 indeed has Electro as the villain, then that would be fantastic, but only if Electro is written very well. I thought Lizard would be a great villain and look how he was written

I always knew he would be terribly written,Didnt like the whole Fathers-Pal idea
The best way to make a Lizard story is introduce him as Peter's Proffesor in the first,build up his story over 2-3 movies before unleashing him as a villian,imo he would have been a perfect Villian for SM4,they have already build up his character(Not too much though) in 3 movies,he had part of the symbiote with himself,maybe something like he studies it to build a serum for regeneration.Seems like a good idea

I have no idea why they were so keen on Vultress and all

 

[Spiderdevil]

Indeed, I don't want Max Dillion to be know who Peter, Gwen, Connors, Harry(if he is in the film), etc. is. I want Electro to be a villain attached to no-one. Except I wouldn't mind maybe Norman and some involvement at Oscorp but overall no one.

Exactly

 

[Spiderdevil]

Same here, but don't get your hopes up, guys. Avi Arad still has the mentality that every villain is better if attached to the hero in some way.

And how exactly did you get to that conclusion?

 

[Spiderdevil]

Agreed, Arad is responsible in some areas with Raimi's trilogy and TAS-M. It's good and bad when it comes to Avi Arad,

'All those bad areas' What do you mean by that?

SM1 and SM2 are excellent films
SM3 is bad and maybe Arad should share some blame along with Raimi
TASM is a good movie,nothing great and nothing bad either.Previously we speculated that the removed sewer scene made the movie bad,now that we have seen it,we know it doesnt change the story much.Plus we have no proof that Arad had it cut off in the first place

So the only bad thing Arad was responsible was part of SM3,Raimi ****ed it up bad aswell
So 2 great spidey movies,one decent and one bad movie under his belt.Mind you all 4 are financially successful movies.Producers rarely have a better record with one franchise

and the ironic thing is all of those bad areas had to do with Spidey mostly, and not any other Marvel property that he's produced. Perhaps while he says he understands the character(Spider-Man), majority of the time he really doesn't.

Haha
I guess you havent seen movies like Daredevil,Fantastic 4,Elektra,Rise of the silver surfer,Blade trinity,Ghost Rider movies,X3,Blade 2,Hulk etc

On the Contrary,his record is best with Spider-man movies

 

[Ultimatehero]

If you mean tied into by ways of origin- alrighty. But having similar arcs, that's just screenwriting making some sort of comparison to keep things sort of organized and with some kind of THESIS or STATEMENT. Otherwise it's somewhat of a mess. If the villain is just thrown in and doesn't connect at all with the overall story, then that is bad screenwriting.

 

[spider-neil]

As long as the villian is memorable then I'm not too fussed about the motivation it's just that best villians (imho) have nearly always had great motivations which lead to them being memorable.

Hans Gruber
Darth Vader
Agent Smith
T-1000
Joker

 

[LegendAssemble]

As long as the villian is memorable then I'm not too fussed about the motivation it's just that best villians (imho) have nearly always had great motivations which lead to them being memorable.

Hans Gruber
Darth Vader
Agent Smith
T-1000
Joker

Thats not really why they're memorable, but i agree.

 

[Jick]

And how exactly did you get to that conclusion?

Watching the words coming out of his mouth.
Try Youtube.

I always assumed it was Raimi who was the one who wanted every villain to be connected to Peter Parker.

I think he did too, but watching and reading to recent interviews of Arad talking about TASM, specially those that occurred here in Brazil, we can see him talking about that. So that mentality is still present and will continue to be until someone says "no, it doesn't need to be like that" and convince Avi of that.

 

[Doc Ock]

I blame Avi Arad for everything that was bad and will stick with believing it foreva!

 

[Anno_Domini]

'All those bad areas' What do you mean by that?

SM1 and SM2 are excellent films
SM3 is bad and maybe Arad should share some blame along with Raimi
TASM is a good movie,nothing great and nothing bad either.Previously we speculated that the removed sewer scene made the movie bad,now that we have seen it,we know it doesnt change the story much.Plus we have no proof that Arad had it cut off in the first place

Doc Ock having some connection to Peter is the biggest thing between S-M 1 and S-M 2 that I am mentioning, but I've noticed that Avi Arad has made a lot of the villains having some relationship to Peter Parker as well in the 90s cartoon. I wouldn't be shocked if Electro has some connection to Peter now.

And you know what Avi Arad forced with Spider-Man 3.

And....the deleted sewer scene changes A LOT from the theatrical cut we see. It takes away the conclusion to Dr. Ratha who was not just some throw away character and we had a much better explanation of Lizard's final plan as well as something to look better on screen on how exactly Lizard showed up in the streets besides us seeing just his head popping up on the screen and getting shot.

So the only bad thing Arad was responsible was part of SM3,Raimi ****ed it up bad aswell
So 2 great spidey movies,one decent and one bad movie under his belt.Mind you all 4 are financially successful movies.Producers rarely have a better record with one franchise

Avi Arad should get way more blame. It's not silly to think Sam Raimi couldn't write Venom correctly because he wasn't a fan of the character and even with the Uncle Ben retcon, I assure you people would have still appreciated Spider-Man 3 more if it had Raimi's original idea.

And I think you're giving Arad too much credit without knowing what he's really done to the character of Spider-Man. Everyone else on this thread has.

Haha
I guess you havent seen movies like Daredevil,Fantastic 4,Elektra,Rise of the silver surfer,Blade trinity,Ghost Rider movies,X3,Blade 2,Hulk etc

Avi Arad has never been vocal about these other characters as much and as never discussed what he's done to change any of these characters and the villains.

On the Contrary,his record is best with Spider-man movies

Highly disagree, but believe what you want.

As long as the villian is memorable then I'm not too fussed about the motivation it's just that best villians (imho) have nearly always had great motivations which lead to them being memorable.

Hans Gruber
Darth Vader
Agent Smith
T-1000
Joker

It's the presence these villains make that are memorable, not having great motivations.

I think he did too, but watching and reading to recent interviews of Arad talking about TASM, specially those that occurred here in Brazil, we can see him talking about that. So that mentality is still present and will continue to be until someone says "no, it doesn't need to be like that" and convince Avi of that.

Could anyone convince Arad though? Raimi certainly could not.

 

[LegendAssemble]

And you know what Avi Arad forced with Spider-Man 3.

And....the deleted sewer scene changes A LOT from the theatrical cut we see. It takes away the conclusion to Dr. Ratha who was not just some throw away character and we had a much better explanation of Lizard's final plan as well as something to look better on screen on how exactly Lizard showed up in the streets besides us seeing just his head popping up on the screen and getting shot.

No one will agree with you, everyone has some kind of stupid reason for thinking that the scene was cut for the the movies sake.

Avi Arad should get way more blame. It's not silly to think Sam Raimi couldn't write Venom correctly because he wasn't a fan of the character and even with the Uncle Ben retcon, I assure you people would have still appreciated Spider-Man 3 more if it had Raimi's original idea.

The movie would have been infinitely better without the black suit. It kinda makes sense given that the them was supposed to be revenge with Harry wanting revenge on Peter, Peter wanting Revenge on Sandman, and Vulture wanting revenge on Spider-Man. The problem is while it makes sense to give Spider-Man the black suit it doesn't make any sense to replace Vultures 2 dimensional minor role with Venom. It takes the focus off the Revenge theme and building up to Harry forgiving Peter and Peter forgiving Sandman to the appearance of Venom, which was doomed to be a disappointment.

I can't wait till Marc Webb gets tired of the bs from Arad and we get an X3 or a second reboot and everyone realizes the reboot was done for reasons of control in the first place. I mean come on.

Does no one else see that this franchize is going to have wayy more production drama than the last one did? Spider-Man 3 wasn't received well but it wasn't received as badly as say ghost rider and it was commercially successful. However during the production he had to fight with the director and the crew the entire time, then when they came to produce the sequel they had even worse disputes. Now that we have the reboot he hires a no one body director whos done one major release and a bunch of music videos...

Regardless of if it turned out well or not, the reboot was done so Avi could have more control and if anyone thinks this franchize is going to go on more than 3 films or Webb will get more control is just being naive, its going to end up just like Raimis once Webb grows some balls.

 

[Oscorp]

I wouldn't be shocked if Electro has some connection to Peter now.

Pun intended? t:

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Pun intended? t:

Looks like it
Good pun