Homecoming Who should be the Villain in Spider-Man (2017)? - Part 1

[ThePhantasm]

The Batboards Rep: An example from April 2013

Spoiler

Just for general info....the Batboards are no longer the worst forum on the Hype.....the Amazing Spider-Man 2 boards have now won the title.

I dunno man, I need some factual evidence of this before it gets the title.

In just one day (yesterday) I handed out 3 infractions, 5 warnings, and one probation.......

Sounds just like the Batboards last year, alright I guess they are pretty terrible.

JUST last year?

Last year was their worse year...especially when all they did was constant complaining that there was no marketing for TDKR.

The TDKR years were pretty bad....but they really made me not want to have anything to do with them (other than officially as a staff member) while TDK was being made.

This is just one example among many. From an administrator, by the way. Remember how Joker said no mods were complaining about the batboards and how awful they were during TDKR?

 

[spideyboy_1111]

The Batboards Rep: An example from April 2013


This is just one example among many. From an administrator, by the way. Remember how Joker said no mods were complaining about the batboards and how awful they were during TDKR?

shhhhh he wont see it...

 

[The Joker]

This is just one example among many. From an administrator, by the way. Remember how Joker said no mods were complaining about the batboards and how awful they were during TDKR?

Two things;

1. That wasn't complaining about the Bat boards there, that was complaining about the TASM 2 forum.

2. They are talking about pre not post release there, which is when Spideyboy falsely claimed it was like the F4 forum.

 

[ThePhantasm]

I'm also seeing countless examples in the community forum while looking through the 2012 threads... you'd have to be blind not to see them.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Surprise surprise, he didn't actually read the quotes I posted. He thinks C. Lee wasn't criticizing the batboards there.

Oh well, this is pointless. Back to Spider-Man, folks. Nothing to see here.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Two things;

1. C. Lee wasn't complaining about the Bat boards there, he was complaining about the TASM 2 forum.

2. They are talking about pre not post release there, which is when Spideyboy falsely claimed it was like the F4 forum.

ummm C.Lee was complaining about the spidey boards... but using the bat boards as an example..

and no we arn't .. i said "around release" how could people complain about bane and the film if they hand't seen it? I know i didn't until i saw it. because that's why i was dissapointed

 

[TheGearMan]

What in heaven's name does this have to do with Spidey?

 

[Venom'sDad]

and if you drastically change the character....

I want the villains to speak for themselves.. there's a reason they've lasted in the books for 60 years. Because people like who they are and how they are written.

Evolving a character does not mean a drastic or complete overhaul of a character. Some of you guys got away of putting words into the overall point, someone makes, to change the very point made...to fit whatever argument against said point.

If you can't see how to use a character outside of what you are use use to seeing...then so be it. Again, that only clarify your lack of imagination & creativity. Characterization is obvious key, in bring any character to life, w/o drastic change...and I would say, some characters need re-inventing...whatever viable use of whatever said character.

 

[ThePhantasm]

What in heaven's name does this have to do with Spidey?

Absolutely nothing. Its a pointless derailment.

Again, I'll ask for a third time... what about those Kraven rumors? Have we heard any more about that?

 

[The Joker]

I think The Joker has about 15 people working next to him on laptops that do all his research for him before me makes a post. It's scary at some times lol.

Tee hee

I have to agree with him though about Bane.

ummm C.Lee was complaining about the spidey boards... but using the bat boards as an example..

Yeah pre release. I.E. like the constant whining about the lack of marketing mentioned.

and no we arn't .. i said "around release" how could people complain about bane and the film if they hand't seen it? I know i didn't until i saw it. because that's why i was dissapointed

Not we, you. That's my point. They mention specifically the problems of the forum pre release not post, which is what you're talking about. You were talking about the release time specifically because of the Bane. Specifically the divide you falsely claimed Bane got (which you are still hilariously denying in spite of haven been proven wrong with both fans and public). Yet you've not been able to show a scrap of proof of this divide, nor the supposed anarchy that ensued after the release. Yet you say I am imagining things lol. I'd swear you're almost pulling my leg here because this is too silly to be a serious argument.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Just ignore him spideyboy_1111, he doesn't know when to quit.

 

[The Joker]

Just ignore him spideyboy_1111, he doesn't know when to quit.

Says he who was a major contributor to this discussion, but now wants to quit just because it doesn't suit him any more. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[SpeterMan3]

What's happening here? C. Lee should be the villain?

 

[ThePhantasm]

Kraven Kraven Kraven... has there been any more news on Kraven?

 

[The Joker]

Kraven Kraven Kraven... has there been any more news on Kraven?

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=32073997&postcount=508

You got an answer for that already.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Definitely fail to see how vulture would be a compelling villain

Only if he teamed up with a bigger and better villain like Dr Octopus. I don't like Vulture much on his own. I prefer when he changes into his younger body.

I must be the only person who considers Neeson's Ra's to have been the best villain of the trilogy. I thought Ra's, Joker and Bane were all excellent villains though and I loved how all of them were portrayed.

Agreed I love them all. I think Joker was best, then Bane, then Ra's. They top 3.

Where? Here? I don't see it. For example he's the second highest ranking villain on this poll after Ledger's Joker; http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=470861&highlight=villain

Nolan Bane and Joker villains always do good on polls. Joker always wins.

and if you drastically change the character....


something i don't want... There's a reason you have arch-enemies and better villains than others.. someone like Vulture and Sandman should not turn out to be villains that are on par with Green Goblin and Doc Ock... you can't make everyone in batman's roster to be as much of a threat and a better villain than Joker...

that doesn't mean they can't be good and entertaining villains though...

I want the villains to speak for themselves.. there's a reason they've lasted in the books for 60 years. Because people like who they are and how they are written.

Agreed. If villain is not good enough then only use for small villain role instead of a main one. I did not think Electro was good enough to be main villain, then I saw the movie and he was hardly in it much. Did not really feel like main villain even though they say he was. I mean Marc Webb said he was.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Tasm 2 didn't even have a main villain tbh. What's funny about SM2 is that Ock is off-screen for a pretty good chunk of the movie. The majority of the movie focuses on Peter's life.

So I dunno. I feel that in Nolan's series Batman wasn't that great. Alot of people say the villains were on his level but at least in the case of Joker and Bane, the villains were placed above him in terms of importance. So it's like good villain, ok hero. Whereas with Marvel it's usually flipped

 

[The Joker]

That's what you call quality over quantity. Raimi and Nolan knew how to keep their hero the most important character, but still deliver great villains (Joker is actually on screen less than Batman, Dent, and even Gordon). It's like Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. He only has like 20 minutes of screen time, most of it with just him sitting in a cell talking, while the rest of the movie is Clarice's story and the hunt for Buffalo Bill, yet Lecter is the most memorable stand out character in it, and that movie alone made him a cinema icon. And all for just sitting in a cell most of the time for 20 minutes.

The hero should always have more screen time and focus than the villain. Some CBMs get that wrong. The Burton movies for instance. The problem with Marvel isn't the villain screen time, it's the actual quality of the villains themselves. A great villain can stand out with just 15 minutes on the screen. Electro might have had that if he had been a half way decent villain. Even with Loki, Marvel's most popular villain (and many would argue only truly great movie villain) you could wonder would he be as popular as he is now if he had stopped after Thor, rather than having three movies?

I think the true test of a great villain is one who can make a great impression with audiences in just one movie, and not need to dominate the movie either to do so.

 

[TheGearMan]

Tasm 2 didn't even have a main villain tbh. What's funny about SM2 is that Ock is off-screen for a pretty good chunk of the movie. The majority of the movie focuses on Peter's life.

So I dunno. I feel that in Nolan's series Batman wasn't that great. Alot of people say the villains were on his level but at least in the case of Joker and Bane, the villains were placed above him in terms of importance. So it's like good villain, ok hero. Whereas with Marvel it's usually flipped

Good to meet someone who feels exactly how I do about villains and Nolan's trilogy.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Tasm 2 didn't even have a main villain tbh.

Marc Webb told us all it did http://movieweb.com/comic-con-2013-...the-main-villain-in-the-amazing-spider-man-2/

But it never felt like it to me.

What's funny about SM2 is that Ock is off-screen for a pretty good chunk of the movie. The majority of the movie focuses on Peter's life.

So I dunno. I feel that in Nolan's series Batman wasn't that great. Alot of people say the villains were on his level but at least in the case of Joker and Bane, the villains were placed above him in terms of importance. So it's like good villain, ok hero. Whereas with Marvel it's usually flipped

I think Raimi Spider-Man movies and Dark Knight movies both make hero important and villains so great. I want Marvel and Sony together to do that too. Get balance right like that.

That's what you call quality over quantity. Raimi and Nolan knew how to keep their hero the most important character, but still deliver great villains (Joker is actually on screen less than Batman, Dent, and even Gordon). It's like Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. He only has like 20 minutes of screen time, most of it with just him sitting in a cell talking, while the rest of the movie is Clarice's story and the hunt for Buffalo Bill, yet Lecter is the most memorable stand out character in it, and that movie alone made him a cinema icon. And all for just sitting in a cell most of the time for 20 minutes.

The hero should always have more screen time and focus than the villain. Some CBMs get that wrong. The Burton movies for instance. The problem with Marvel isn't the villain screen time, it's the actual quality of the villains themselves. A great villain can stand out with just 15 minutes on the screen. Electro might have had that if he had been a half way decent villain. Even with Loki, Marvel's most popular villain (and many would argue only truly great movie villain) you could wonder would he be as popular as he is now if he had stopped after Thor, rather than having three movies?

I think the true test of a great villain is one who can make a great impression with audiences in just one movie, and not need to dominate the movie either to do so.

Agreed. I like Loki but I liked him best in Avengers.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Evolving a character does not mean a drastic or complete overhaul of a character. Some of you guys got away of putting words into the overall point, someone makes, to change the very point made...to fit whatever argument against said point.

If you can't see how to use a character outside of what you are use use to seeing...then so be it. Again, that only clarify your lack of imagination & creativity. Characterization is obvious key, in bring any character to life, w/o drastic change...and I would say, some characters need re-inventing...whatever viable use of whatever said character.

I dont really think a character with 60 years of history needs changing... there's some characters that simply shouldnt carry a movie, and cant. But you know what? Thats COMPLETELY OK. They do not need to. That doesnt mean you can't utilize them, and that doesn't mean they cant be awesome and fun villains either.... it just means you can tell a great story with them working with another villain.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Absolutely nothing. Its a pointless derailment.

Again, I'll ask for a third time... what about those Kraven rumors? Have we heard any more about that?

Im hoping not... i really want kraven in a sequel after lizard has been introduced. .. for kravens last hunt.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Agreed. If villain is not good enough then only use for small villain role instead of a main one. I did not think Electro was good enough to be main villain, then I saw the movie and he was hardly in it much. Did not really feel like main villain even though they say he was. I mean Marc Webb said he was.

Yeah electro i was angry with him being even considered a "main villain" from the get go.. the man is a mentally unstable thug who was blessed with an amazing power, and decided to use it irresponsibly. Hes a terrible skeemer, and never been a great planner of skeems...

And hes very dangerous because he's unstable

I didnt want him anything but that... and wanted him paired with sandman or hydroman

I was so annoyed with those in the amazing 2 thread wanting him to be this "bad ass" villain that they expected to rival ock and green goblin..... -__-

I like comic electro because he's a loser and a screwup with deadly abilities...

 

[ernesth100]

I'm still hoping if we get Rhino the Avengers send out the Hulk to help him. That'd be freaking epic.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Tasm 2 didn't even have a main villain tbh. What's funny about SM2 is that Ock is off-screen for a pretty good chunk of the movie. The majority of the movie focuses on Peter's life.

So I dunno. I feel that in Nolan's series Batman wasn't that great. Alot of people say the villains were on his level but at least in the case of Joker and Bane, the villains were placed above him in terms of importance. So it's like good villain, ok hero. Whereas with Marvel it's usually flipped

Id argue imo... batman's villains are far more interesting than batman or bruce wayne has ever been... and they actually define who he is