Homecoming Who should reboot villain be? (Poll Version)

[DigificWriter]

^ They're not anymore, but they haven't scrapped the project entirely, either.

They're taking a few steps back before taking a hundred steps forward re: S6, Venom, and the female-centric film.

 

[Tymminator]

The fact Sony is going to "reconsider" its plans for Sinister Six is enough proof for me that it ain't happening.

I don't see a stand alone S6 happening, but with the right buildup, a Spidey vs S6 film as a sequel in the new SM franchise could be quite good.

 

[Spider2099]

I don't see a stand alone S6 happening, but with the right buildup, a Spidey vs S6 film as a sequel in the new SM franchise could be quite good.

Same.

 

[DigificWriter]

I don't see a stand alone S6 happening

I do, because making an S6 film has the potential to generate huge financial benefits for Sony, especially if their deal with Marvel Studios keeps getting extended and expanded and they're able to use events in MS-produced movies to 'seed' foundational ideas for this movie and other 'side project' films.

 

[Spider2099]

A Thor movie isn't even able to hit $700M. How is a movie about a team of villains going to do better?

 

[Tymminator]

I do, because making an S6 film has the potential to generate huge financial benefits for Sony, especially if their deal with Marvel Studios keeps getting extended and expanded and they're able to use events in MS-produced movies to 'seed' foundational ideas for this movie and other 'side project' films.

Has the potential? A S6 movie without Spidey IMO has limited potential. The very point of the S6 being brought together in the comics is to team up and get Spider-man, it's the very heart of its very existence, so to do it without Spider-man is folly, again IMO.

 

[Tymminator]

A Thor movie isn't even able to hit $700M. How is a movie about a team of villains going to do better?

Thor 2 did hit a bit over 700M actually.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I don't think that necessarily is too much for one movie. It would have been different if sandman stayed gone and venom was the only threat.

It COULD work, but in order to do the story justice, it needs two movies. Plus a spin-off with Flash as Agent Venom taking on Carnage.

 

[Spider2099]

I remember from the leaked e-mails that the Sinister Six film was turned into a Spider-Man movie, according to Amy Pascal. I don't think Sony would move forward with a standalone S6 film anyway.

 

[Spider2099]

Thor 2 did hit a bit over 700M actually.

It earned $644M worldwide.

 

[Tymminator]

It earned $644M worldwide.

My bad, you're right. I was thinking of Cap2.

 

[DigificWriter]

Has the potential? A S6 movie without Spidey IMO has limited potential. The very point of the S6 being brought together in the comics is to team up and get Spider-man, it's the very heart of its very existence, so to do it without Spider-man is folly, again IMO.

It was never said that the S6 movie wouldn't have Spidey in it in some capacity, and the fact that this deal now gives Sony even more 'room to play' than they had before pretty much guarantees that we'll see Spidey in the movie, at least by my estimation.

 

[Spider2099]

It was never said that the S6 movie wouldn't have Spidey in it in some capacity, and the fact that this deal now gives Sony even more 'room to play' than they had before pretty much guarantees that we'll see Spidey in the movie, at least by my estimation.

Andrew said that his role in the S6 film was immaterial. This was before TASM plans were scrapped. It was confirmed in the leaked e-mails that the film was originally intended to be a villain movie but was later altered into a Spider-Man film with Drew Goddard.

 

[Tymminator]

Andrew said that his role in the S6 film was immaterial. This was before TASM plans were scrapped. It was confirmed in the leaked e-mails that the film was originally intended to be a villain movie but was later altered into a Spider-Man film with Drew Goddard.

Best me to it. Damn, you're fast.

 

[Great Mind(s)]

Someone else suggested Bryan Cranston as Norman Osborn. I think he along with Kingpin and Smythe could be cool. Norman should be an overarching villain for the MCU. And Kingpin should be shared with Daredevil.

 

[spiderman2]

I don't see a stand alone S6 happening, but with the right buildup, a Spidey vs S6 film as a sequel in the new SM franchise could be quite good.

That is what I want to happen at some point. I would love to see like 4 sm movies to bulid up to s6 or something.

 

[Surfer]

Love the Sinister Six, but the purpose of the Sinister Six is to do what none of them could do on their own, which is to take out Spider-man. Therefore, making Spider-man a necessary part of any story revolving around the Sinister Six. Without him they lose their purpose for teaming up and could just as easily do their evil deeds on their own. So, if it is then assumed Spider-man is required to give them purpose, then it should be equally assumed Spider-man would need to make a strong appearance within a Sinister Six movie for it to be successful. However, at that point one would have to ask why call it Sinister Six (a virtually unknown name to general audience members) when they could cash in on Spider-man with a title like Spider-man: The revenge of the Sinister Six. So, yeah I say bring on the Sinister Six for like part 3 or perhaps even 4 or 5 of the new Marvel/Sony Spider-man movies, but the idea of doing the Sinister Six as a seperate movie and possibly without Spidey, terrible idea. However, I trust in Marvel and I really don't think they would have made the deal with Sony if they felt they couldn't trust them to listen to their advice with relationship to the use of their characters. Sony knows by listening to Marvel their Spider-man franchise will bring them in the billions (at least eventually) that it always had the potential of doing, but for whatever reason seemed to evade their grasp. So, if Marvel tells Sony doing a seperate Sinister Six movie is a bad idea for everyone involved, I got to believe that Sony is going to respect their knowledge of the characters and either scrap the project or build it with Marvel's help into a future Spider-man movie. So, everyone panicing because we don't know enough about the deal details, I just really got to believe that the people over at Marvel Studios wouldn't have made the deal if they felt doing so would jeopardize their well established connected cinematic universe. What they have done so far with the MCU tells me they are very intelligent individuals with a passion for their characters, so I have every faith that Spider-man joining the MCU is a good thing for all parties involved, especially fans.

Surfer

 

[Protar]

Someone else suggested Bryan Cranston as Norman Osborn. I think he along with Kingpin and Smythe could be cool. Norman should be an overarching villain for the MCU. And Kingpin should be shared with Daredevil.

I was thinking Bryan Cranston as Kraven. Kraven would make a great first villain for Spiderman's new franchise. He's a man of simple motives - so we're not bogged down with complex origin stories or conspiracies. But he can tie very well into Civil War - the government could hire him to hunt down unregistered supers. He's the perfect villain for this film. And Cranston is the perfect guy to play him - he can do rugged and threatening, but he also has comedic talent, which is important for Marvel and especially Spiderman. I could see him as GG as well.

Mysterio seems to be very popular. I'm not really familiar with him, but he seems a little too bizarre for the first film. They need to go back to basics.

 

[Oscorp]

One thing I've noticed with most antagonists in films and games these days is that they claim to do things "for the greater good", believing that what they're doing is actually good.

I'm feeling that specific characteristic of villains is starting to become a cliché. It feels like an easy and cheap way for studios to make villains appear deep.

The important thing for me is to be able to understand the villains without necessarily sympathizing with them or their motives. As long as their actions are logic results of their goals, they don't need to have a false sense of good.

In the real world there are people who act out of selfish motives. If they act out of those motives, I will understand their actions even if I far from agree with them. Someone trying to kill Spider-Man just to prove himself better? That's bat**** crazy, but from Kraven's point of view I understand it. I don't need his obsession of Spider-Man to be explained in any other, forced way.

 

[CaptainWagner]

I still hold that Kraven as the star of a reality show would work perfectly. His ego and arrogance would lend itself to the role of a larger than life television personality, traveling the world hunting both beasts and men, using "magic herbs" to enhance his strengths and senses. He answers JJJ's call to bring in the "criminal" Spiderman, and after a humiliating defeat, becomes increasingly unhinged.

 

[The Overlord]

Here is my big problem with Vulture, his power is not that impressive in the context of the Marvel universe, where a lot of characters can fly and do a million other things. Heck, with his gilder Green Goblin can fly, is as strong as Spidey and has better weapons then Vulture, Green Goblin seemed have made Vulture redundant right away.

At least Mysterio brings a different element to a story, considering he is more of a psychological threat then a physical one.

 

[Oscorp]

I still hold that Kraven as the star of a reality show would work perfectly. His ego and arrogance would lend itself to the role of a larger than life television personality, traveling the world hunting both beasts and men, using "magic herbs" to enhance his strengths and senses. He answers JJJ's call to bring in the "criminal" Spiderman, and after a humiliating defeat, becomes increasingly unhinged.

I'd prefer Kraven to be fairly unknown and more of a myth. He's a silent predator. He works on his own and doesn't care about fame, only his own feeling of pride. I never liked the USM take on him.

Here is my big problem with Vulture, his power is not that impressive in the context of the Marvel universe, where a lot of characters can fly and do a million other things. Heck, with his gilder Green Goblin can fly, is as strong as Spidey and has better weapons then Vulture, Green Goblin seemed have made Vulture redundant right away.

At least Mysterio brings a different element to a story, considering he is more of a psychological threat then a physical one.

I agree. What would make him an exciting villain is more his personality traits rather than his abilities. The suit enhancing his strenght could raise the stakes a bit, but Vulture would probably need to share the film with another villain.

 

[Frodo]

I'd actually go for outside the box choices for some of the villains. I would cast more toward types as opposed to look alikes which match the comics. For a Ock who's brillant yet slightly mad and capable of evil, I would go with Martin Freeman. I could see him as a meek scientist who suddenly see's himself as a god with his robotic arms.

For Vulture, i'd want someone who isn't just a bald old guy, but someone who is manipulative, evil, and some who would be relentless like him namesake. Therefore I'd go with Daniel Day Lewis who could pose a viable threat as both Adrian Toomes and as Vulture.

For Kraven the Hunter, I would go with an actor who could portray someone with a great sense of honor yet also and undercurrent of madness. At the same time the actor would have to convey humanity yet be a true threat. That's why I'd go for Bradley Cooper. Yes, I know he does the voice of Rocket, I don't care.

For Norman Osborn, I'd go for someone as dynamic and charismatic as RDJ. He's the ultimate viable counter weight to Stark in the MCU. Not a clown like Hammer or a poser like Killian, but someone who is dynamic and someone who would be a larger then life figure. He's got to be the kind of person who would inspire someone like the impressionable Parker while at the same time making him someone who Harry couldn't live up to. He's also has to be someone who can display the evil and madness of the Green Goblin. The actor that keeps coming to mind for me is Brad Pitt. He's not the conventional choice, and he's not in the mold of William Defoe or Chris Cooper. But he's what Norman Osborn would likely be in the MCU and he's the age Norman would be if you have actors like Lerman and O'Brien in the role of a teenage Peter Parker.

 

[Spider2099]

I just want a villain who isn't sympathetic. Can't a villain just be a villain because he is selfish and greedy? Can a villain like Sandman or Vulture just go out and steal money because they want to get rich? Of course they need to make things a bit more complex for the movie and not just "I have powers or tech so I'm going to rob a bank now." But Sandman doesn't need to be stealing money to save his daughter and Vulture shouldn't have to steal money because he wants to improve the conditions at his retirement home. Make them BAD guys. I don't want to feel bad for them.

 

[UltimateWebhead]

One thing I've noticed with most antagonists in films and games these days is that they claim to do things "for the greater good", believing that what they're doing is actually good.

I'm feeling that specific characteristic of villains is starting to become a cliché. It feels like an easy and cheap way for studios to make villains appear deep.

The important thing for me is to be able to understand the villains without necessarily sympathizing with them or their motives. As long as their actions are logic results of their goals, they don't need to have a false sense of good.

In the real world there are people who act out of selfish motives. If they act out of those motives, I will understand their actions even if I far from agree with them. Someone trying to kill Spider-Man just to prove himself better? That's bat**** crazy, but from Kraven's point of view I understand it. I don't need his obsession of Spider-Man to be explained in any other, forced way.

There are several of Spider-Man's villains that are sympathetic and if they are done properly, there's no way to get around that. But I agree that villains are becoming cliche. And turning or attempting to turn every villain into a sympathetic one is lame. For an example outside of Spider-Man movies, look at how Maleficient ruined that character from her original appearance in Sleeping Beauty. They not only made her into a sympathetic villain, they turned her into a hero.

I really like your 3rd paragraph. There's no need to force feed these stupid sympathetic reasonings into the villains--just give them their own set of selfish goals and the proper logic to follow them.