Homecoming Who should be the Villain in Spider-Man (2017)? - Part 2

[Venom'sDad]

Mr. Negative or Prowler as the villain? Zac Efron for Venom?

Last time I checked they were doing a reboot not ASM3. Thank God some of you ain't going to be helping make this.

I strongly disagree. Those are the kind of ideas that led to this whole thing happening in the first place.

 

[PeterBenParker]

Mr. Negative or Prowler as the villain? Zac Efron for Venom?

Last time I checked they were doing a reboot not ASM3. Thank God some of you ain't going to be helping make this.

Some made suggestions and some responded to said suggestions, lol. Don't be so ignorant -- especially with your "Thank God some of you ain't going to be helping make this."

Simply saying, "I'd be cool with Zac." doesn't automatically mean, "ZAC EFRON FOR VENOM!", sunshine.

 

[Webhead2006]

efron isnt a out right terrible actor. If he was to be in mcu via tv or the films. Brock really isnt a role i want him for. He probably would be better suit for a different role. Be it a supporting player in a role, or maybe a different hero/villain. Who i dont really have a good idea who he fit better. But i dont see him as brock myself. There is loads of actors i want as brock before him.

As for first film villain i still want to go with mysterio. Again he is a totally different villain then the past films have done. And there is cool elements they can play with. And he would likely work well along with the parker life angle they want to play up on. Then i still would like a secondary threat like shocker. To be a threat used once or twice in the film. Or i still like my idea of tossing in a few c,d lister guys for a fun monatage type deal.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Shocker isn't really a joke so much as he's just doing his supervillain job to make ends meet and keeps getting screwed over. He's like Peter that way.

Hes a joke not on the same level as the walrus or some of the F list silly villains out there are.. but the whole fearsome foes team is somewhat of a joke.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Zac Efron will in his thirties by the time they introduce Brock. (assuming they introduce him in the second movie) So they can still explore that dynamic.

*cringes

No version of venom has ever been remotely like efron... hell to the no

Hes not a bad actor, just ill fitted.

Human torch, nova, even spidey himself... all good choices and the tywpe of roll hed knock out of the park... brock? No

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Better than talking about the same **** over and over again

Same ole poo is much better than diarrhea. ...

 

[Webhead2006]

personally i dont count shocker as a total joke villain or put him with the z listers. Sure he might not be known for many great stories over the past 40+ yrs he been around. But he is definately better then alot of the real z lister types. Come on he is def better character/foe then the likes of white rabbit, leapfrog, grizzly, warlus, hypo hustler to name a handful.

 

[Venom'sDad]

Hes a joke not on the same level as the walrus or some of the F list silly villains out there are.. but the whole fearsome foes team is somewhat of a joke.

Many posters, such as yourself, say that about a number of Spidey's rogue gallery of villains; yet, many of you, such as yourself, want these very same villains done mostly like in the comics.

When someone, such as myself, suggest tweaking these villain more maturely, with a more realistic motivation or support apparatus, with slight changes to their persona, skillset, and, level of intelligence & scheme, w/o encroaching to heavily on their very essence of being....many of you call it sacrilegious or SM3/TASM2....but love how Russo's Cap & Nolan's Bat is approach to their films, involving those title character's villains....as well as, fan-fav like Loki & Raimi's DocOck.

There's no doubt, we all are fan favorites of Spidey & Co. and want to see any screen adaptation done, in all areas, near to perfection; but that however, requires some changes, character usage, and tweaking of the character comic makeup, in order to get the full proper use out of the character, understanding & situation of these characters, a mature motivation in context, and thesis of the story.

Got to think outside the box of old, past, adaptation; but, refer to them as a guideline or insight into the character being/essence, and what motivate them....not some carbon copy past version done into today's current era. What "is" a truly joke in the comic, can be made a formidable villain...just got to do your homework and build that particular villain world around him, into a world we all relate to.

 

[AvegningSpider]

Many posters, such as yourself, say that about a number of Spidey's rogue gallery of villains; yet, many of you, such as yourself, want these very same villains done mostly like in the comics.

When someone, such as myself, suggest tweaking these villain more maturely, with a more realistic motivation or support apparatus, with slight changes to their persona, skillset, and, level of intelligence & scheme, w/o encroaching to heavily on their very essence of being....many of you call it sacrilegious or SM3/TASM2....but love how Russo's Cap & Nolan's Bat is approach to their films, involving those title character's villains....as well as, fan-fav like Loki & Raimi's DocOck.

There's no doubt, we all are fan favorites of Spidey & Co. and want to see any screen adaptation done, in all areas, near to perfection; but that however, requires some changes, character usage, and tweaking of the character comic makeup, in order to get the full proper use out of the character, understanding & situation of these characters, a mature motivation in context, and thesis of the story.

Got to think outside the box of old, past, adaptation; but, refer to them as a guideline or insight into the character being/essence, and what motivate them....not some carbon copy past version done into today's current era. What "is" a truly joke in the comic, can be made a formidable villain...just got to do your homework and build that particular villain world around him, into a world we all relate to.

 

[Majik1387]

Efron was on the short list for Bucky Barnes, just sayin. Plus with his positive relationship with the Disney corporation, it would not be out of left field for him to be optioned in any kind of MCU role.

 

[Webhead2006]

Sure he could be someone in mcu I and others are just saying we don't think he be best suited for brock. Some other character sure.

 

[Majik1387]

Eh, you never know if they skip over Eddie Brock and just go with Flash Thompson Venom.

 

[harryoscop]

Some made suggestions and some responded to said suggestions, lol. Don't be so ignorant -- especially with your "Thank God some of you ain't going to be helping make this."

Simply saying, "I'd be cool with Zac." doesn't automatically mean, "ZAC EFRON FOR VENOM!", sunshine.

*cringes

No version of venom has ever been remotely like efron... hell to the no

Hes not a bad actor, just ill fitted.

Human torch, nova, even spidey himself... all good choices and the tywpe of roll hed knock out of the park... brock? No

I think he could pull it off. I could totally see him playing the "desperate, sleezy photographer", plus there's no denying that he looks the part:

Spoiler

and has the right physique for Venom

Efron was on the short list for Bucky Barnes, just sayin. Plus with his positive relationship with the Disney corporation, it would not be out of left field for him to be optioned in any kind of MCU role.

He's very much on Marvel's radar.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

I'd disagree on all fronts he'd basically be Topher Grace 2.0. I don't think he has what it takes to make Venom a viable villain

 

[Frodo]

As far as Efron for Brock goes , it depends on what type of Brock they want for the film and what the character in that version would be like. For now, my favorite live action portrayal of Brock was from Truth in Journalism. In that version he wasn't a big, intimidating, thug type at all. So, it would depend if he was suited for the Brock in the script.

Frankly , I felt Grace was fine as Brock in SM3 because they were clearly going for a different type of personality and characterization. He fit what Raimi was going for , but what he was going for , I didn't find that interesting .

On a side note, I actually think Efron could have made a good, charming, and athletic, version of Harry Osborn if they weren't going back to HS for the reboot.

 

[Oscorp]

Speaking of actors, I honestly think Peter Stormare could make a pretty cool Spider-Man villain, perhaps Mysterio.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Stormare has a vulture look to me. And Frodo that's an interesting point, I guess if he could pull off the truth in journalism type Brock he'd do ok. Thing is Ryan Kwanten pulls off a sleazy dude and I'm not so sure Efron would.

 

[Webhead2006]

Well since we will be doing teen peter possibly for 3 solo films. I seriously doubt they do agent venom with flash when flash is a kid. It makes more sense to start with brock. Then at a later time brock is removed from venom. The govt gets it hands on it. And we do agent venom as a possible spinoff later. Doing a teen flash as venom would be dumb call.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Eh, you never know if they skip over Eddie Brock and just go with Flash Thompson Venom.

That would be best thing to do.

 

[Spiderine]

Many posters, such as yourself, say that about a number of Spidey's rogue gallery of villains; yet, many of you, such as yourself, want these very same villains done mostly like in the comics.

When someone, such as myself, suggest tweaking these villain more maturely, with a more realistic motivation or support apparatus, with slight changes to their persona, skillset, and, level of intelligence & scheme, w/o encroaching to heavily on their very essence of being....many of you call it sacrilegious or SM3/TASM2....but love how Russo's Cap & Nolan's Bat is approach to their films, involving those title character's villains....as well as, fan-fav like Loki & Raimi's DocOck.

There's no doubt, we all are fan favorites of Spidey & Co. and want to see any screen adaptation done, in all areas, near to perfection; but that however, requires some changes, character usage, and tweaking of the character comic makeup, in order to get the full proper use out of the character, understanding & situation of these characters, a mature motivation in context, and thesis of the story.

Got to think outside the box of old, past, adaptation; but, refer to them as a guideline or insight into the character being/essence, and what motivate them....not some carbon copy past version done into today's current era. What "is" a truly joke in the comic, can be made a formidable villain...just got to do your homework and build that particular villain world around him, into a world we all relate to.

Absolutely

Good writing can make it work.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

That would be best thing to do.

I don't think it's as effective that way

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Many posters, such as yourself, say that about a number of Spidey's rogue gallery of villains; yet, many of you, such as yourself, want these very same villains done mostly like in the comics.

When someone, such as myself, suggest tweaking these villain more maturely, with a more realistic motivation or support apparatus, with slight changes to their persona, skillset, and, level of intelligence & scheme, w/o encroaching to heavily on their very essence of being....many of you call it sacrilegious or SM3/TASM2....but love how Russo's Cap & Nolan's Bat is approach to their films, involving those title character's villains....as well as, fan-fav like Loki & Raimi's DocOck.

There's no doubt, we all are fan favorites of Spidey & Co. and want to see any screen adaptation done, in all areas, near to perfection; but that however, requires some changes, character usage, and tweaking of the character comic makeup, in order to get the full proper use out of the character, understanding & situation of these characters, a mature motivation in context, and thesis of the story.

Got to think outside the box of old, past, adaptation; but, refer to them as a guideline or insight into the character being/essence, and what motivate them....not some carbon copy past version done into today's current era. What "is" a truly joke in the comic, can be made a formidable villain...just got to do your homework and build that particular villain world around him, into a world we all relate to.

That's why I even brought up Prowler and Mr. negative. Think about it, these two guys are practically getting laughed at. But they have TONS of potential and no baggage. No previous film experience and no one expecting them to be great. That's why I think if utilized with care they could change everybody's mind. Loki wasn't a fan favorite before the avengers and thor. And no "classic" villain so far can be described as even remotely fitting into a hughesian story as much as posters may try. I hate the idea of a teenage villain but this is a teenage spidey we're talking about.

 

[harryoscop]

That's why I even brought up Prowler and Mr. negative. Think about it, these two guys are practically getting laughed at. But they have TONS of potential and no baggage. No previous film experience and no one expecting them to be great. That's why I think if utilized with care they could change everybody's mind. Loki wasn't a fan favorite before the avengers and thor. And no "classic" villain so far can be described as even remotely fitting into a hughesian story as much as posters may try. I hate the idea of a teenage villain but this is a teenage spidey we're talking about.

I don't know much about Prowler (Aside from the ultimate comics) but he's a teenager? :/

I think we just want to see a classic villains, I don't think there's a need to venture into obscurity with villains like Prowler and Mr. Negative when we have villains like Mysterio, Vulture, Shocker and Kraven who have yet to be tapped for the big screen.

 

[AvegningSpider]

That's why I even brought up Prowler and Mr. negative. Think about it, these two guys are practically getting laughed at. But they have TONS of potential and no baggage. No previous film experience and no one expecting them to be great. That's why I think if utilized with care they could change everybody's mind. Loki wasn't a fan favorite before the avengers and thor. And no "classic" villain so far can be described as even remotely fitting into a hughesian story as much as posters may try. I hate the idea of a teenage villain but this is a teenage spidey we're talking about.

And there is the perfect explanation on why we have to get more villains besides the ones we expect like Mysterio, Vulture, Kraven and company. Prowler and Mr. Negative have the potential of being top notch villains (i'll say Clash too but i got shutdown someties before so....) and who knows, as far as we know they are using Spot as the main villain (The guy can neuralize the Spider-Sense by creating portals to Spotworld arround Peter, the guy can basically teleport, he revived numerous times before, the guy has top tier potential if written properly)

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

I don't know much about Prowler (Aside from the ultimate comics) but he's a teenager? :/

I think we just want to see a classic villains, I don't think there's a need to venture into obscurity with villains like Prowler and Mr. Negative when we have villains like Mysterio, Vulture, Shocker and Kraven who have yet to be tapped for the big screen.

Not necessarily a teenager but a younger guy, and in the context of the movies I'd imagine they'd make him a teenager because it'd fit into the whole vibe of "this is what Peter would be as a bad guy" which alot of his villains are. But yeah I'd be as excited as anyone else to see Shocker or Mysterio I just wanna see new fresh topics and discussions going in here for once. This forum has been pretty boring and repetitive lately.