Homecoming Who should reboot villain be? (Poll Version)

[Spider-Gnome]

I'm against introducing the Green Goblin first. For three main reasons:

1. It would require using the Green Goblin quickly, and quite frankly the audience needs a break from him after 3 of the 5 films featuring some version of him. Four if you count his role in the plot of Spider-Man 2.

2. Harry's role as Peter's best friend is an important one. This lessens it to some degree, and not having a well-built Harry/Peter relationship was one of the many problems with TASM2.

3. Everyone knows at this point that Norman Osborn is the Green Goblin, so there is no payoff.

I definitely think it is better for their characters and their relationship to Spider-Man to introduce the Osborns first.

Not sure if that's aimed at me, but I agree with all of the above. I want Gobby eventually, just not right away. But I'd like to see Norman and Harry introduced in the first movie (or even Civil War?). Develop the characters first.

(And hire Bryan Cranston as Norman )

Edit: again what Joker said

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Not sure if that's aimed at me, but I agree with all of the above.

Thanks. I wasn't aiming at anyone in particular. Just adding my thoughts on the general discussion about whether to introduce the Green Goblin or Norman & Harry first.

 

[I'm Batman.]

A year of workouts? It doesn't take THAT long to get into shape for the role.

Ackles already has the physique. I'd like to see him gain 25 lbs of muscle for the role.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

I think Lizard deserves to be done right on screen. He would mix so well with Kraven IMO.

This was actually the route I was hoping they were gonna go with SM4. I still think they'd make a great duo.

 

[Frodo]

I'm against introducing the Green Goblin first. For three main reasons:

1. It would require using the Green Goblin quickly, and quite frankly the audience needs a break from him after 3 of the 5 films featuring some version of him. Four if you count his role in the plot of Spider-Man 2.

2. Harry's role as Peter's best friend is an important one. This lessens it to some degree, and not having a well-built Harry/Peter relationship was one of the many problems with TASM2.

3. Everyone knows at this point that Norman Osborn is the Green Goblin, so there is no payoff.

I definitely think it is better for their characters and their relationship to Spider-Man to introduce the Osborns first.

Spot on. No Green, Hobgoblin, or New Goblin, in the first couple of films.

 

[The Infernal]

Speaking of shockers. Anyone else a fan of Shocker being a possible villain or even the villain's hired henchman?

 

[Morbius]

Henchman maybe, but I don't think he can carry a movie as a main villain in the slightest

 

[X Knight]

I'd be ok with Mysterio as the main villain in the 1st film. he's someone we haven't seen before.

 

[Morbius]

Mysterio's powers could be a fun way to show Uncle Ben and Gwen's death but redone to suit the MCU

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Speaking of shockers. Anyone else a fan of Shocker being a possible villain or even the villain's hired henchman?

I think a primary-secondary villain method would work. like the nolan batman trilogy.

 

[BrollySupersj]

Speaking of shockers. Anyone else a fan of Shocker being a possible villain or even the villain's hired henchman?

I've always loved Shocker, so I'd like to see him as a main villain. What's people's opinion on Scorpion being used this time? I'd say it's about time he gets his due. He's been in both movie sets of movie games, yet not one movie.

 

[The Infernal]

Scorpion is someone I'd like to see as a MCU Spidey villain. I wouldn't mind if they had JJJ secretly hire Scorpion to capture Spider-man and it goes wrong and either Norman Osborn or Wilson Fisk find out and try and blackmail JJJ for it.

Mysterio's another one I'd like to see. I would like to see his costume adapted for film. Though I have trouble picturing how they'd tackle his special FX/illusions for film and make it seem like a credible threat to Spider-man. I don't think they could do some of the illusions shown in the cartoons or comics and still expect cinema audiences to suspend their disbelief.

 

[The Overlord]

I've always loved Shocker, so I'd like to see him as a main villain. What's people's opinion on Scorpion being used this time? I'd say it's about time he gets his due. He's been in both movie sets of movie games, yet not one movie.

How would Shocker be the main villain in a movie? If all he does rob banks, how do you have an escalation that leads towards the climax of the film if all Shocker does is rob banks like he does in the comics?

Heck why should I care if Spidey stops Shocker from robbing a bank or not? Most bank robbers are smart enough not to hurt the tellers and the customers, the money is insured and likely marked, at this point in time foiling bank robbers seems like a waste of time for super heroes, there are no real stakes involved. Heck at this point I don't know why Shocker bothers with robbing banks, when he could make more money through cyber crime then bank robbery. Shocker would need a serious rewrite to be compelling enough to be the Big Bad a movie.

I think the problem with Scorpion is he always seems rather stupid and not very ambitious. Scoripion would work better as muscle for another villain, then being a Big Bad.

 

[harryoscop]

I'd like to see Shocker, with Kingpin pulling the strings behind the scenes.
He should be only be a side villain, though.

 

[C. Lee]

OK....here we go.....

After checking multiple sources.....we (the Admins) have come to the conclusion that Morbius and WeAreVenom are two different people. So all arguing about this will cease now.

The WeAreVenom name will be unbanned....BUT....it will be put on probation for several weeks due to a couple of things he did.


PEOPLE......ARGUING ON THE BOARDS OVER PETTY CRAP WILL NOT END WELL FOR PEOPLE...SO I SUGGEST YOU DON'T DO IT.

 

[The Overlord]

I'd like to Shocker, but with Kingpin pulling the strings.
He should be only be a side villain, though.

I would agree, Shocker would be a alright as a henchman, but he should not be the Big Bad of the film, Shocker is just not interesting enough to carry a film as the main villain.

 

[Morbius]

Thank you very much. Glad my good name is cleared up

Joker, I respectfully still disagree with your points on there being no possibility of Venom having an interesting storyline on screen. As I've also mentioned before there are still more interesting villains to use - it's just not a stretch to assume a team of writers can come up with an engaging story for one of the most popular Spidey villains in history.

Mysterio being the obvious choice. We can learn more about the new Spidey through use of Mysterio's holograms and props etc

 

[harryoscop]

Thank you very much. Glad my good name is cleared up

Joker, I respectfully still disagree with your points on there being no possibility of Venom having an interesting storyline on screen. As I've also mentioned before there are still more interesting villains to use - it's just not a stretch to assume a team of writers can come up with an engaging story for one of the most popular Spidey villains in history.

Mysterio being the obvious choice. We can learn more about the new Spidey through use of Mysterio's holograms and props etc

Mysterio is definitely the villain they should use for the first film

 

[The Infernal]

While I'm not pushing for Shocker as a main villain on his own, I don't really buy that he couldn't hold his own if they did pick him as the only villain. I think all it takes is the right story. And as far as just robbing banks goes. I don't see much wrong with a straightforward story if it's still compelling enough. As long as you have good characters that are written well and you care for then that should be what matters.

 

[BrollySupersj]

While I'm not pushing for Shocker as a main villain on his own, I don't really buy that he couldn't hold his own if they did pick him as the only villain. I think all it takes is the right story. And as far as just robbing banks goes. I don't see much wrong with a straightforward story if it's still compelling enough. As long as you have good characters that are written well and you care for then that should be what matters.

Works for me.

Anyway, I like Mysterio, but I wouldn't push for him to be the villain in this new flick.

 

[Baneis8feettall]

I'd go with Vulture. He was one of Spidey's first villains in the comics (ASM#2)and he could be the inventor of Falcon's tech and he had it stolen from him (like how Spectacular introduced him). And like Spectacular and your post, have a number of villains introduced pre-super villain, like Otto and Norman.

Vulture makes a lot of sense.

1. Not someone who can steal the movie from Spider-Man...or doesn't need much background. Focus can be on introduction of Peter Parker's life and other characters in his life for the first movie and still vulture wouldn't be wasted like some other MCU villains.

2. Lots of cool scenes in air with Spider-Man. (since Goblin is out most likely) Visually would make the movie awesome.

3. His age would be great contrast to teenage Spider-Man.

4. He is one of the sinister six. (upcoming movie)

5. His motives aren't complicated. He can share scenes/ team up with other villains without much of a problem. (Shocker,Kingpin etc.)

6. He has history with Daily Bugle/JJJ and Kingpin. That might help story if they wanna use them in movie.

7. Falcon tech. reference perhaps?

 

[Baneis8feettall]

While I'm not pushing for Shocker as a main villain on his own, I don't really buy that he couldn't hold his own if they did pick him as the only villain. I think all it takes is the right story. And as far as just robbing banks goes. I don't see much wrong with a straightforward story if it's still compelling enough. As long as you have good characters that are written well and you care for then that should be what matters.

Shocker, Vulture, Kingpin. They can all somehow related with bank robbery etc. crime. Multiplevillains without spending too much time on their backgrounds/motives or forcing screenplay with unrelated characters team up like SM3.

First Spidey movie will be introduction to his world. Spend as much as time establishing Parker's world strong enough for audience to care about it.

Kinda like how Batman Begins had Zsasz, Scarecrow & Ra's Al Ghul meanwhile spent quite time on Bruce Wayne/Batman's life and side characters around him.

 

[The Overlord]

While I'm not pushing for Shocker as a main villain on his own, I don't really buy that he couldn't hold his own if they did pick him as the only villain. I think all it takes is the right story. And as far as just robbing banks goes. I don't see much wrong with a straightforward story if it's still compelling enough. As long as you have good characters that are written well and you care for then that should be what matters.

But how do make a guy who just robs banks and does little else compelling? Really robbing banks is the most generic and unimaginative thing you can have a villain do, its not scary, its not sympathetic, its literally the most lazy thing you can do with a villain.

Again, how do have rising action that leads an exciting, when the villain doesn't have a plan or series of actions that lead to building action and an exciting climax? Shocker robbing banks through out the film doesn't fit in with a 3 act story with exciting climax, it pretty anti climatic if the end of the movie is just Spidey foiling a bank robbery, that seems more like a filler TV episode then a movie.

Frankly I think fans make Shocker into a greater character then he actually is the comics, he doesn't have a really compelling personality or back story or anything that makes stand out from the crowd. With the event of cyber crime, bank robbery has been in decline, Shocker's MO is no longer relevant. Shocker could make more money on his laptop then he could robbing banks.

The lazy super villain who robs bank for a quick buck is a lazy, outdated cliche that needs to be retired.

 

[BrollySupersj]

But how do make a guy who just robs banks and does little else compelling? Really robbing banks is the most generic and unimaginative thing you can have a villain do, its not scary, its not sympathetic, its literally the most lazy thing you can do with a villain.

Again, how do have rising action that leads an exciting, when the villain doesn't have a plan or series of actions that lead to building action and an exciting climax? Shocker robbing banks through out the film doesn't fit in with a 3 act story with exciting climax, it pretty anti climatic if the end of the movie is just Spidey foiling a bank robbery, that seems more like a filler TV episode then a movie.

Frankly I think fans make Shocker into a greater character then he actually is the comics, he doesn't have a really compelling personality or back story or anything that makes stand out from the crowd. With the event of cyber crime, bank robbery has been in decline, Shocker's MO is no longer relevant. Shocker could make more money on his laptop then he could robbing banks.

The lazy super villain who robs bank for a quick buck is a lazy, outdated cliche that needs to be retired.

He doesn't exactly have to rob banks, they can figure out something else for him to do. In the Amazing Spider-Man 2 game, he was a gang leader (just an example). It doesn't always have to go by the books in every detail.

 

[The Overlord]

He doesn't exactly have to rob banks, they can figure out something else for him to do. In the Amazing Spider-Man 2 game, he was a gang leader (just an example). It doesn't always have to go by the books in every detail.

That still makes Shocker seems more like henchman material then being the Big Bad of the film.

Really not every comic book villain is suited to be the main villain of a film and really Shocker just seems more like a natural henchman then anything else.