So the Jungle hunter having some low level strength and stamina powers out of a jungle juice potion is supposed to make him a class visual fighter in a scrap like the rest of the super powered bads? Man giving a jungle man more strength and speed ain't make his fights look cooler. It just makes him able to do them faster and longer. Trying pitching this to Marvel and Sony for Kraven being their one and only baddie in their collaborative Spider-Man movie. I reckon I can hear them laughing already.
They need to do this baby right. The last lot of movies made a pig's ear out of the baddies. Kraven on his todd isn't the way to go. He's not up to the action section all by himself. Share the load with Scorpion or Rhino. Some lower level villain with an animal name that he could hunt. Too soon for Lizard. I think he deserves better than being Kraven's hunt prey anyway.
I'm glad to see other people are getting this besides myself
I think if they were to do Kraven it would be better for him to be something along this line. You already have a hero who's got Spider dna in him so it wouldn't be so radical if Kraven did have genetically enhanced dna with various strains of different animals. I mean, aside from some fanboys, there wouldn't be any real outrage if they made him more than just a human.
Again, it might not be enough to win over those who don't want him as a side or main villain since that's more of a taste issue. That said, giving him a physical advantage and even edge of an animal would work alot better on film then magic positions imo. I think he could work as a solo villain but not in the "Let me destroy the city", "I want to rule New York" scale that's been used before. Kraven would better work more in a smaller scale story in which the stakes aren't about destroying city blocks but about targeting and hunting Spiderman/Peter Parker and the people he cares about. A film where the stakes are the lives of his family and friends, would certainly be compelling enough to keep the audience invested without having yet another villain who wants to destroy Manhattan, turn people into minions , are get the attention of the news media.
See while I personally don't want them to mutate Kraven into a animal/man hybrid, I can understand why some people would want it. Even the great TSSM cartoon went this route. I think you're right, an animal DNA hybrid would come off better than magical jungle potions, but they could alter that to make it a serum of some kind rather than a jungle potion, which just sounds corny.
But Kraven works fine as he is within his limitations. Sure he's not great in the big spectacle action department, but he doesn't have to be. Let him have an intimate one on one fight with Spidey. Let him be the brain villain of the story. That's all he needs to be. Kraven's never been a big stakes villain anyway. Even when he joined the Sinister Six it was only to hunt Spider-Man. He never joined in any of the world domination schemes later on.
Not really. The glider was important for the fight on the bridge. For the fight at the Macy's parade? It was hardly important. Any bomb hurling foe could have achieved the same scale of damage, which wasn't much to begin with. Aside from popping a few balloons, Goblin mostly took out a few outdoor mezzanines and caused general panic, but he didn't really do much damage, at least not compared to say Iron Man's fight with Iron Monger, any fight from Avengers, Superman's fight with the Kryptonians in Smallville.
Yes really. Without the glider 75% of that scene could never have happened. I can't believe you're even disputing that. How could a bomb hurling foe have achieved the same scale of damage at the heights the Goblin did, and with the same speed and accuracy, too, without the glider?
Comparing the first Goblin fight, to the last (and only) fight with Iron Monger and the Kryptonians is really silly. The fights are of course supposed to get bigger in scale after the first one.
I stated that Spidey met Goblin in battle on the ground, and you then make a contradictory statement about Spider-Man swinging into Goblin, but then state that the battle had barely begun by the time both characters are on the ground...which was my initial point. No actual fighting took place until both characters were in the ground. And even once the Goblin and Spidey were in the air, they still had a fight that could have happened on the ground. Only one Spider-Man fight in that entire movie (the bridge fight) was dependent upon the glider, but even with that concession, your point is proven weak at best, as pretty much every other fight was impacted by Goblin riding a glider.
What is contradictory about saying the battle had barely begun? You said Spidey met Goblin first on the ground. That's incorrect. He met him in the air by swinging into him on his glider. Spidey dealt the first blow. Goblin fell. Fight began. But had barely begun since they had barely gotten into it yet but the fight had begun nonetheless. So there is no contradiction.
And yes the fight was heavily dependent on the glider. I don't fathom how you can logically try and argue otherwise. Most of Goblin's moves in that scene involved him using his glider. Fact.
All of that is beside the point, because your initial claim was that Kraven was just a jungle man with spears. When it was pointed out to you that Kraven indeed has powers and has a power set similar to one of the villains you listed, you just started making excuses. This is a fallacy called moving the goal posts. Previously I stated i was uninterested in proving you wrong, but this time you flat out are wrong because your argument has devolved into a number of irrelevant statements meant to bolster a flaccid argument that was disproved several posts ago.
Kraven is just a jungle man with spears. Your points that he takes a potion to up his strength and stamina doesn't change that. It doesn't automatically turn him into something else entirely that operates and fights differently. It just makes him a more improved version of a jungle man with spears, but still just that.
I have not changed anything. You're the one who brought up this whole Goblin/Kraven being the same argument, and now you're flailing on points, which are so incorrect that you've got to be kidding me trying to argue them. The whole glider thing especially. If these characters were so interchangeable with their powers and abilities, there would be a huge complaint about lack of diversity amongst Spidey's villains.
I suppose they were high tech, but having to dodge those flying razors is nothing that couldn't be achieved by watching Spider-Man dodge bullets, boomerangs, bolas or any other projectile or launched weapon. And bombs aren't all that high tech. Explosives are an old technology from ancient China (circa tenth century). The glider is the most high tech piece of Goblin's arsenal, but everything else amounts to guns, bombs and blades...two of those three are items in Kraven's arsenal. So...yeah...
Yeah I'll concede to that point. The general effect of the razor bats could be achieved with bolas and boomerangs. Maybe not as fancy as the razor bats which followed Spidey automatically and kept zooming in to get him, but that's a minute change. I'll give you that one.
And what is keeping Kraven from doing that same thing? Kraven has an established upper press limit of 2 tons. A bank vault door would be well within his power range. Also, you keep saying "visually stimulating" but that is such a nebulous claim. What determines that something is visually stimulating? You have yet to outline the criteria/on for this statement. Hurling bombs and blades seems to be on your list based on your Goblin references, and those are things that Kraven is capable of doing. Hurling large objects also seems to be on your list, but again, this is something Kraven is quite capable of. On top of that, before Spider-Man received numerous power buffs, there was a point where Kraven was physically stronger than Spider-Man (Lee and Ditko era).
Is this a serious question? Which would look more visually cool? A guy in leopard skin throwing a vault door or a man with four long mechanical tentacles doing it. Stop and think about that question you just asked.
As for strength, the Kingpin is physically more stronger than Electro or Mysterio, but take a wild guess which one would provide a better visual action scene.
So again, what is your point? You keep moving the goal posts. You ignorantly stated that Kraven is just a "jungle man with spears." It was pointed out that Kraven has powers. Then you said that his powers aren't the same as other villains and therefore can't provide the same visual stimulus. You then proceed to cite Green Goblin, who has a nearly identical power set. I am not sure you even know what you really want. You just have it out for Kraven, even though you have proven yourself ignorant about the history of the character.
I haven't moved any goal posts. I have just been responding to all your points. From the silly assertion that all action movies are the same, right up to the Goblin and Kraven analogy. This is your ship, I'm just a passenger on it. You're steering this. Kraven is just a jungle man with spears. The addition of enhanced strength doesn't change what he is, it just makes him a stronger version of it. He most certainly cannot provide the same visual stimulus as the other villains. You have failed to explain how he could. Your argument has rested on strength factor. Oh yes and the fact he can throw things.
If anyone has proven themselves ignorant on this topic here it's you. When someone says Kraven can give a fight scene like a Goblin can, then you know you're talking to someone who has not got any real knowledge of either character.
I am not bluffing my way through anything. Thus far, you were grossly incorrect about the nature of Kraven, after claiming you understood the character. You made several and repated ignorant comments (I mean ignorant in the pure sense of a lack of knowledge) about the nature of Kraven, only to be flatly proven incorrect (such as your lack of knowledge of Kraven's power limits, power set, weapons, fighting abilities etc). I don't have to go point for point to illustrate that you are making a bevy of fallacious claims to pander to your weak argument. But if you wish, yes, there was one fight in Spider-Man 3 in which flight provided a dynamic that Kraven in particular could not easily replicate. Beyond that, the fights with Venom and Sandman were all within the sphere of the same kind of fight that Kraven could offer, as again, these fights were all fist fights. The fact that Sandman changed shapes has no real bearing on the ultimate nature of the battle between he and Spider-Man...
I do understand the character. Infinitely more than you it seems. You concede that there was a Goblin fight in the movies that Kraven could not replicate. Very big of you and all, but if you are conceding to that fact, then it should be obvious to you that Kraven cannot provide what the Goblins provide for the most part. Every villain can throw a punch, or throw something at Spider-Man. That isn't what makes them unique. It's their visual way of doing it. It's how they do it. It's what they use to do it etc.
Kraven throwing a boomerang vs Goblin flying in on a glider throwing a pumpkin bomb. No contest on which would look cooler. Kraven puling a bank vault door off vs Ock ripping one off with his tentacles. Again no question of which would look cooler.
A jungle man doesn't light up the screen flexing his muscles, throwing boomerangs and what not, or trading punches with Spidey like the other villains in a fight do.
I already told you SEVERAL TIMES and SEVERAL posts ago that you are welcome to your opinion.
Well thanks, that's very generous of you
I simply suggested that you avoid conflating your opinion with fact, avoid assuming that the limits of your imagination mean that others can't imagine a better scenario than you, and avoid stating that Kraven can't offer a dynamic fight.
But it is a fact. I can't offer you statistical evidence to prove it, it's a common sense fact, shown with all five previous Spider-Man movies, and it will be proven again when they announce the villain or villains, and like I said you can bookmark these posts for proof, because we all know who ever they choose it won't be Kraven on his own. Nor Kingpin. Or Chameleon. Or any villain like them who can't bring visual eye candy action to the screen.
You don't know what motivates people to watch superhero films, so your claim there was unfounded. You ignorantly stated that Kraven is "just a jungle man with a spear" which pretty much tells that you don't know thing the first about the character, as you didn't even know about his serum or power set (or at least nothing you stated suggests that you know that the character does have super powers). You said your issue was that Kraven didn't have sufficient powers to be a solo villain, and therefore couldn't offer a dynamic fight, and you were wrong there as well. Keep your opinion, stop treating it like a fact.
I don't know what motivates people to watch superhero movies? Well now lets look at the facts here. Yes or no, do big visual eye candy spectacle fight scenes play a big part in these Spider-Man movies? Yes. Has any of the movies so far relied on a villain like Kraven, or Kingpin, or Chameleon who cannot bring that kind of mind blowing action to the table? No.
So you tell me, is it wrong to feel confident that the big spectacle action scenes are a key important factor in selling these movies? Rhetorical question. Of course they are. Kraven can provide a great savage fight scene. But not a big eye candy spectacle one that these movies must have.
You disagree, that is great, but don't come at me with pseudo-facts (read: opinions) when I am taking the time to deconstruct your argument, back up my claims with proof and generally take the time to acknowledge your arguments, even when they have more holes than swiss cheese. Good lord, I should change my screen name to the "credible hulk", because I actually give a damn about sources and facts when making a claim. I'm done, because this conversation is derailing the thread.
No offense but all you have done is attempt to apply what I can only call half baked logic, and ignorance of facts about characters, into an argument that has either misconstrued events on movies, or relied on a single key factor as a crutch to make a character into something they're not. So no offense seeing you say you give a damn about source and facts sounds really funny. Maybe it's true outside of this thread, but it sure has not been in this discussion.
You're right this discussion has derailed the thread, but I do hope in future when the time comes for when the villain or villains for this movie are announced, you will bear it in my mind. Not because I want to say I told you so (I didn't even gloat when the TASM movies got canned by the Marvel deal). But just so you will hopefully see the point I've been making in how Marvel and Sony approach these movies in their choice of villains. Visual possibilities, or lack thereof, is a key element in their choosing. Because action scenes are such an important part of these movies. The flashier the villain, the better the action possibilities.
Anyway I did enjoy our discussion overall. Peace out.