If only Tommy Lee Jones was younger.
That would have worked.
If only Tommy Lee Jones was younger.
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Bryan Cranston for Green Goblin/Norman
Make it happen Marvel/Sony
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
No one really knows.
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Which costume do you peeps want Spider-Man to wear in the new film series? For me I would like to see him wearing costume with a similar style, desing and color to the first Superior Spider-Man costume but a bit baggy like Miles Morales' first Spider-Man costume.
Man, looking back at the original Amazing Spider-Man comics... it's amazing just how many long-lasting villains were introduced in the first 2 years. Chameleon, Vulture, Doctor Octopus, and Sandman were the villains of the first four issues. You also had Lizard, Electro, Mysterio, Green Goblin, Kraven, Scorpion, and Beetle. It's pretty rare that you have that many memorable villains in such a short amount of time.
While true, in addition to Spidey appearing in Civil War, there's also talk of MCU characters appearing in the solo Spider-Man films. That being the case, it sounds like it would be in Sony's and Marvel's best interest to have the characters and stories woven as tightly as possible. So while Sony have final say over what happens to Spidey, I would expect them to mostly let Marvel lead the way with the character's overall direction. Everyone benefits from Spidey being an integral part of the MCU, and I would hope that everyone involved in the deal(s) see that.Marvel can't put in anything dictating what Sony can or can't do in their contract with the actor. They don't own the character and legally have no say in what Sony does.
There is NOTHING Marvel can do to tell Sony what to do, they have no legal standing on the character. Sony is letting Marvel use the character, it is not the other way around. Technically Sony can go and have Spider-Man into a mass murderer in a Sinister Six movie if they wanted, they wouldn't do that obviously but Marvel can't tell them what they have to do. Marvel has no ownership over the character.
So essentially, the car is still owned by Sony. But Marvel's driving the car & Sony's riding shotgun.While true, in addition to Spidey appearing in Civil War, there's also talk of MCU characters appearing in the solo Spider-Man films. That being the case, it sounds like it would be in Sony's and Marvel's best interest to have the characters and stories woven as tightly as possible. So while Sony have final say over what happens to Spidey, I would expect them to mostly let Marvel lead the way with the character's overall direction. Everyone benefits from Spidey being an integral part of the MCU, and I would hope that everyone involved in the deal(s) see that.
I've never understood what people find funny about these things.I request his name be changed from Spider-Man to Spodermen
What about something like this for Venom?If it were me...
His origin is glossed over in Civil War.
Spider-Man 1: Kraven the Hunter
Spider-Man 2: The Sinister Six
Spider-Man 3: Green Goblin
I'd let Venom in this universe be something else that ties into the Cosmic side of the Marvel U, either Flash as a broken down vet gets access to it, or Eddie at his last rope gets access to it, and Parker never gets it. Let's get a new spin on it other than a jealous rejection angle.
If Venom is going to be in the new Spider-Man film series there should be multiple people that become venom at the same time throughout the films like an army and at the end only a few people such as Eddie (as classic Venom, Anti Venom, or Toxin) , Cletus (as Carnage) and Flash (as Agent Venom) get to keep their symbiote.
What about something like this for Venom?
If it were me...
His origin is glossed over in Civil War.
Spider-Man 1: Kraven the Hunter
Spider-Man 2: The Sinister Six
Spider-Man 3: Green Goblin
I'd let Venom in this universe be something else that ties into the Cosmic side of the Marvel U, either Flash as a broken down vet gets access to it, or Eddie at his last rope gets access to it, and Parker never gets it. Let's get a new spin on it other than a jealous rejection angle.
Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Vulture being Spiderman's first supervillian is still really weird to think about. I remember I had a reprinted issue of that and I always wondered how an old man with wings could possibly be a challenge to Spiderman.
If it were me...
His origin is glossed over in Civil War.
Spider-Man 1: Kraven the Hunter
Spider-Man 2: The Sinister Six
Spider-Man 3: Green Goblin
I'd let Venom in this universe be something else that ties into the Cosmic side of the Marvel U, either Flash as a broken down vet gets access to it, or Eddie at his last rope gets access to it, and Parker never gets it. Let's get a new spin on it other than a jealous rejection angle.
That's the idea and they can have it begin from the first movie until the inevitable Venom movie.Sounds kinda like a body invasion
Chameleon was the first, though. A lot of people seem to forget about him, however.
He looks like a flying squirrel there with the way his back muscle is drawn.Which costume do you peeps want Spider-Man to wear in the new film series? For me I would like to see him wearing costume with a similar style, desing and color to the first Superior Spider-Man costume but a bit baggy like Miles Morales' first Spider-Man costume.
]
Well, Chameleon was an enemy that Spiderman and the Fantastic Four had to deal with in his first appearance. The Vulture was Spiderman's first solo enemy.
That was only because Marc Webb had a contract with Fox and it was the only way Sony was able to get Fox to release him so he could direct ASM2Speaking of the Fantastic Four, thank goodness Marvel and Sony were able to make a deal on Spidey. If I recall a DoFP teaser was at the end of one of the ASM movies. Could you imagine if Fox tried courting Sony into a deal, just to keep Spider-Man away from Marvel?
I think Kraven is much harder to do than most of the other villains. If done, he seems to need to be introduced into an already established spectrum between reality and pulp.
Go completely off the wall and throw Morlun in that bitch.Who should the villain in the 2017 film be?
Into my vains!
So essentially, the car is still owned by Sony. But Marvel's driving the car & Sony's riding shotgun.
Well, I'm not saying he needs to be given a lion's head vest as a costume.
He's just a broken man with nothing to live for that gets his jollies off of hunting things. Outsmarting things. He's like The Predator, right?
Someone gives him the opportunity to chase the prey of a lifetime. He's like Roland Tembo from The Lost World. You don't need to give him a ton of backstory, just let his insane actions speak for themselves, like dressing up as Spider-Man and then blowing his brains out at the end after letting Parker go.
He did it because he could.
I'm saying it's more difficult to usher in a human character battling a superhero than introduce him after some of the primary super villains have been established.
I'd like to see him though.
That'd be my guess. Disney have been successful with Mavel by using the same strategy Jobs taught them for dealing with Pixar; smile, be accommodating, and collect the fat checks. Sony have been successful with Spidey, but it's clear that Marvel are firing on all cylinders right now. Sony should be looking to benefit by contributing to Marvel's efforts, not guiding them. These aren't "Sony movies" any more than they're "Disney movies." They're "Marvel movies."So essentially, the car is still owned by Sony. But Marvel's driving the car & Sony's riding shotgun.
So essentially, the car is still owned by Sony. But Marvel's driving the car & Sony's riding shotgun.
disney owns merchandise rights. The better a Sony spider-man movie does the better the toy tie ins do which disney gets the money on.That'd be my guess. Disney have been successful with Mavel by using the same strategy Jobs taught them for dealing with Pixar; smile, be accommodating, and collect the fat checks. Sony have been successful with Spidey, but it's clear that Marvel are firing on all cylinders right now. Sony should be looking to benefit by contributing to Marvel's efforts, not guiding them. These aren't "Sony movies" any more than they're "Disney movies." They're "Marvel movies."
The only issue I can see is if Disney get upset about Marvel making money for Sony "instead of" Disney, but Disney still own the lion's share of the properties, and I think they ones they do own are made that much stronger by Spidey's presence in the MCU.
Yeah that would be a good design but should be in a darker blue and red color or black and red color while also looking like it was designed and made by someone with no experience. However they can make Peter Parker be somebody that's into cosplay and has experience designing and making costumes or be friends with somebody that's into the cosplaying scene like Gwen Stacy or kamala khan.He looks like a flying squirrel there with the way his back muscle is drawn.
I'm honestly happy with ASM2's suit but with his muscles being a bit more defined throughout the suit.
Well, there you go. Between that and being able to integrate Spidey in to the nine movies Marvel have scheduled for Phase Three, that should keep Disney pretty happy. And if Marvel are willing to make Sony's movies better and more profitabledisney owns merchandise rights. The better a Sony spider-man movie does the better the toy tie ins do which disney gets the money on.