Spider-man 4: The Sinister Six

[Rabuzzi]

I agree. There's a way to do the Sinister Six, that makes sense. I mean, if Harry hadn't gone all "good" in 3. He could take up the mantle of the Geen Goblin (Instead of the X-Treme!!! Goblin), and we find out that under the guise of his company cleaning up their own mess, he has built a prison, which he uses to house all the criminals Spidey has defeated (The Vault, anyone?). It wouldn't be too hard to think that Doc Ock might still be alive, and that Harry could blackmail or convince him into donning the tentacles again. Same with Sandman, and Venom, naturally. Or maybe give the symbiote to Cletus Kasady, and make him Carnage. Whatever. Part of Harry's sick genius is that he has been keeping these villains alive, so he can use them to crush Spider-Man. So, now you have four. The beginning of the movie could be a completely unrelated preface to the second act. That's where the Kraven/Lizard idea could work. But resolve that storyline at the end of act 1, and move into the Vault, when Peter delivers the final two villains to Harry's custody. Then, the whole rest of the movie could be ridiculous action sequences, without worrying about characterization. Remember, not every villain has to have a reason for being a villain. Maybe Kraven's just a jerk. Why do movie studios go to so much trouble getting us to like the villain? You can make a villain interesting and compelling, without making him a hero. Hannibal Lecter? Denzel in "Tarining Day"? It can be done. It would have been better, if they had had the idea all along, so they could sow the seeds of the future plots, but it can still be done.

[ManThing11]

I like the Kraven/Lizard idea but, I'd also like to see the Ben Reilly, Miles Warren, Carrion, Kaine, Jackal, Scarlet Spider thing. Like, Warren inds out who Parker is while watching him fight with Jackal (we don't know its the clone yet), and he gets blood and clones him and 1 is unsuccessful, but escapes, and so he does another one and it's Scarlet Spider, and, to play in with the Mary Jane drama, Reilly puts the moves on MJ and she likes him, but, anyway, and then somehow Kaine finds Peter and Peter has to team up with Scarlet Spider to beat him, and somehow Jackal dies so Warren makes Carrion. If that doesnt work out, i'd like to see those sinister six villains, but Mercs, like in Reign (if anyone read it) hired to take out Peter.

[ARROW]

Remember, not every villain has to have a reason for being a villain. Why do movie studios go to so much trouble getting us to like the villain? You can make a villain interesting and compelling, without making him a hero.

 

Read Robert McKee's book: STORY--for the best explanation why.

 

The gist of it is that all the best villians believe they are doing "good"--and those kinds of villains are deeper and more complex because they do not do evil things for the sake of being evil.

 

Any villain that is spotlit for any amount of time on screen needs both a personality, and motivation--hence a reason for their villainy.

The longer they are on screen, or the more distinct they are on screen ( in the case of distinctive costumes compared to other characters around them) then the greater the need for a reason for them to be there.

 

See, audiences know when their intelligence is being insulted ( or so we think), so avoiding characterization in favour of action just isn't going to sell a film. Part of the reason the "better" villains tend to be explored is because those qualities that make them fail as a person are so interesting and increase the rapport with the audience.

Tragedies are a common element in a lot of villains, especially Marvel villains.

Unfortunately, the blanket demonization of villains is also common place, rendering them into little more than automatons. In terms of conflict with a hero, a heartless cold evil just isn't as compelling as a charming dastardly, but ultimately tragic, evil.