Marvel Vs. DC on the Silver Screen

[ShadowSlider]

But that's the thing, he wasn't even really the big bad of the first movie. That title goes to Ra's al Ghul. Scarecrow was just his underling for most of the film. He does kinda become Scarecrow at the end, and I was really hoping they were going to do something special with him later on.

Now, I don't bitch that they didn't because the next two films were amazing without him and were honestly better for his lack of involvement, but I just don't understand how he went from a true psycho at the end of Begins, to perfectly sane in TDK.

It's a bit of a minor gripe overall, but it's still the only real one I have against the Nolan trilogy.

[TheGlyphstone]

That is why I specified 'main focus big bad'. Sure, Ra's Al Ghul is technically the man-behind-the-man manipulating the whole thing. But you only find that out in the, like, last 15 minutes of the film. For the rest of it, Scarecrow is the Bad Guy that batman is pitted against, until suddenly he's revealed as the underling...

Y'know, I just recognized the parallels between this aspect of BB and the Trevor/Killain Mandarin thing that drags down Iron Man 3 so badly. Not identical, but similar in the bait-and-switch villain angle. Yet DC/Nolan pull it off to decent acclaim, and Marvel crashbombs it straight into PR disaster.

[Vorian]

Y'know, I just recognized the parallels between this aspect of BB and the Trevor/Killain Mandarin thing that drags down Iron Man 3 so badly. Not identical, but similar in the bait-and-switch villain angle. Yet DC/Nolan pull it off to decent acclaim, and Marvel crashbombs it straight into PR disaster.

Kind of. The big difference is Scarecrow was still Scarecrow even if he was working for someone else, and he's not Batman's nemesis in the same way Mandarin is to Iron Man. Imagine if instead they'd passed off a loser in a clown suit as the Joker, as a front for Hush. In a series that hasn't seen the real Joker yet to give the deception impact in universe.

... Actually that still sounds like it could be better than Iron Man 3 if done well. But it'd be bound to piss off some fans.

[TheGlyphstone]

Kind of. The big difference is Scarecrow was still Scarecrow even if he was working for someone else, and he's not Batman's nemesis in the same way Mandarin is to Iron Man. Imagine if instead they'd passed off a loser in a clown suit as the Joker, as a front for Hush. In a series that hasn't seen the real Joker yet to give the deception impact in universe.

... Actually that still sounds like it could be better than Iron Man 3 if done well. But it'd be bound to piss off some fans.

Like I said. Same core elements, vastly better execution.

Admittedly, Batman doesn't really have a 'core nemesis' equivalent to Mandarin. Joker is one of his more prominent ones, but his rogues' gallery is pretty diverse. Comparatively, Tony has The Mandarin, and a big long list of 'Dude With Power Armor' bad guys.

[Vorian]

Like I said. Same core elements, vastly better execution.

Admittedly, Batman doesn't really have a 'core nemesis' equivalent to Mandarin. Joker is one of his more prominent ones, but his rogues' gallery is pretty diverse. Comparatively, Tony has The Mandarin, and a big long list of 'Dude With Power Armor' bad guys.

True, True. Batman has one of the strongest rogues galleries, and Iron Man's is fairly weak overall. But the Joker is the one who's most personal for both of them, I think, and always the first who comes to mind for me. I'd have a harder time pinning down a single main villain for Spiderman personally.

[TheGlyphstone]

True, True. Batman has one of the strongest rogues galleries, and Iron Man's is fairly weak overall. But the Joker is the one who's most personal for both of them, I think, and always the first who comes to mind for me. I'd have a harder time pinning down a single main villain for Spiderman personally.

My mind instantly jumped to Green Goblin as the 'iconic' Spidey villain.

Superman has Lex Luthor.

Fantastic 4 have Doctor Doom.

Green Lantern has.....uh....Yellow Lantern? Or any street thug with a baseball bat, depending on which iteration of GL you use.

[Vorian]

My mind instantly jumped to Green Goblin as the 'iconic' Spidey villain.

Yeah, probably. But Venom is a very close second in my mind, almost to the point of being a toss up between the two. If only because Venom is an enemy Peter largely created himself.

It also doesn't help that Norman went global/Lex Luthor wannabe lately, to the point were I actually want to see a real showdown between him and Iron Man more than him and Spiderman.

Green Lantern has.....uh....Yellow Lantern?

Sinestro. Or the Guardians depending on how you look at it.

[TheGlyphstone]

Yeah, probably. But Venom is a very close second in my mind, almost to the point of being a toss up between the two. If only because Venom is an enemy Peter largely created himself.

It also doesn't help that Norman went global/Lex Luthor wannabe lately, to the point were I actually want to see a real showdown between him and Iron Man more than him and Spiderman.

Eh. Peter's involvement with Venom's creation is kinda iffy, since he had nothing to do with the creation of the original symbiote; he was just the first unlucky host. But I'll allow Venom as the best runner-up, the way General Zod is Superman's #2 iconic opponent despite him appearing vastly less often than Luthor.

Sinestro. Or the Guardians depending on how you look at it.

Right. That dude.

GL isn't far behind Iron Man in the 'lame rogues' gallery' department, since most of them are 'guy with different colored magic space ring'. Plus, he's has a run of the stupidest power-draining weaknesses (Wood, then the Color Yellow).

[ShadowSlider]

Yeah, probably. But Venom is a very close second in my mind, almost to the point of being a toss up between the two. If only because Venom is an enemy Peter largely created himself.

It also doesn't help that Norman went global/Lex Luthor wannabe lately, to the point were I actually want to see a real showdown between him and Iron Man more than him and Spiderman.

I'll also second Venom, for pretty much the exact same reason. Peter may not have had anything to do with the symbiote, but he had A LOT to do with Eddie Brock.

I'd also second Venom because he's Spider-Man's dark reflection. He's everything Spider-Man would've become if Peter hadn't had the positive influences of his Aunt May and Uncle Ben. On top of that, Venom's ability to nullify Peter's Spider-Sense makes him one of Spider-Man's deadliest enemies by far.

Really, the only reason I would rank Venom below the Green Goblin is because Venom hasn't had the same effect on Peter's personal life. I mean, Gwen Stacy? There's really no topping that.

[Vorian]

I gather it's been retconned since, but the way I heard it in the original story the symbiote wasn't really hostile or particularly dangerous until Peter rather painfully rejected it. So he's kinda responsible for what Venom became from that angle too. It sorta plays into the theme of responsibility in a way that the Goblin doesn't.

But yeah, true about Gwen.

[TheGlyphstone]

fair enough, Venom's got an excellent case - and yeah, without Gwen Stacy, Goblin wouldn't be the lead candidate.

[ShadowSlider]

I gather it's been retconned since, but the way I heard it in the original story the symbiote wasn't really hostile or particularly dangerous until Peter rather painfully rejected it. So he's kinda responsible for what Venom became from that angle too. It sorta plays into the theme of responsibility in a way that the Goblin doesn't.

But yeah, true about Gwen.

The big reason Peter rejected the symbiote was because it was amplifying his aggression and was starting to turn him into what Venom ultimately became. So while his rejection of it DID give it a grudge and a reason to want revenge, the symbiote has still always been dangerous on its own.

[Vorian]

The big reason Peter rejected the symbiote was because it was amplifying his aggression and was starting to turn him into what Venom ultimately became. So while his rejection of it DID give it a grudge and a reason to want revenge, the symbiote has still always been dangerous on its own.

See, that's just it - I've heard that was added in after the fact (or in an adaptation, I forget) to to justify Peter's rejection of it. Originally all it was doing running around as Spiderman at night and he rejected it as soon as he found out it was alive without stopping to think or attempt to communicate. There's a pretty good run down of it here. Of course each new adaptation ramps up the hostility of the symbiote even more.

[ShadowSlider]

See, that's just it - I've heard that was added in after the fact (or in an adaptation, I forget) to to justify Peter's rejection of it. Originally all it was doing running around as Spiderman at night and he rejected it as soon as he found out it was alive without stopping to think or attempt to communicate. There's a pretty good run down of it here. Of course each new adaptation ramps up the hostility of the symbiote even more.

Huh. Well, that's what I get for going by the 90's cartoon. :P

[TheGlyphstone]

And this is one of the flaws of Marvel-style soft continuity vs. DC's periodic hard reboots. Retcons stack on top of retcons.

[Top Cat]

See, that's just it - I've heard that was added in after the fact (or in an adaptation, I forget) to to justify Peter's rejection of it. Originally all it was doing running around as Spiderman at night and he rejected it as soon as he found out it was alive without stopping to think or attempt to communicate. There's a pretty good run down of it here. Of course each new adaptation ramps up the hostility of the symbiote even more.

Nah. I was reading Spider-Man at the time, and the writers definitely wrote in that it was taking control of Peter's body and making him more of a loose cannon. Going to sleep at home, in bed, and waking up on the side of a skyscraper wasn't just written for the movie... that's comic-canon, too. It wasn't just that it was alive, but that it was gradually trying to take over his body that made Peter try to get rid of it.

Wiki description of the events:

Writer Tom DeFalco and artist Ron Frenz subsequently established that the costume was a sentient alien symbiote and also that it was vulnerable to both flame and high sonic energy during their run on The Amazing Spider-Man. It was in that storyline that the costume would envelop Peter Parker while he slept, and go out at night to fight crime, leaving Parker inexplicably exhausted in the morning. Parker had the costume examined by Reed Richards, who discovered that it was alive, and when Parker realized it was trying to permanently bond to Parker's body, he rejects it, and it is contained by the Fantastic Four. The Symbiote escapes and attacks Parker, who uses the sound waves from a cathedral's church bell to repel it.

When combined with Eddie Brock, who already had a significant (one-sided) grudge against Peter Parker (and was already a bit mentally warped), it became decidedly unhinged, since both symbiote and host wanted to kill Peter at that point.

Over the subsequent story arcs, it's been established that the symbiote is amoral at least, if not outright pathological. While being worn by Mac Gargan (Scorpion), it more or less took over for large portions of time, and had Mac engage in cannibalism (something that Mac, as vicious as he was, wouldn't have done by choice).

[Vorian]

Over the subsequent story arcs, it's been established that the symbiote is amoral at least, if not outright pathological. While being worn by Mac Gargan (Scorpion), it more or less took over for large portions of time, and had Mac engage in cannibalism (something that Mac, as vicious as he was, wouldn't have done by choice).

Amoral sure, but it's also been well established both in the main continuity and in the Spidergirl universe that the personality of the host has a major impact on that - a vicious host makes a vicious symbiote, a heroic host makes a more heroic symbiote, even to the point of self sacrifice. And this is a sentient being we're talking about here, one who can be very beneficial to a host. I wouldn't say Peter was wrong to reject it, but there were much better ways to handle the situation that weren't even attempted and it resulted in a major problem for Peter out of something that could have been a positive. It goes back to the theme of responsibility - instead of resolving the situation peacefully or even ensuring the symbiote was contained or destroyed, he hurt it in a rather brutal fashion and let it loose on the world. Venom is largely what Peter made of it.

Edit: I also feel that even with the symbiote directly amping up his aggression the way adaptations of it usually do, Peter still handled the situation badly. His actions were understandable, and something had to be done about it, but once you realize that the symbiote is sentient and how traumatic what Peter did to it was, so is the symbiote's reaction. Things could have played out very differently if he'd gone to Xavier for help instead of Reed Richards.

[Mathim]

All this does is prove the point that Sam Raimi shouldn't be blamed for being forced to shoehorn Venom into Spiderman 3 and ruin the whole thing. Not that I was that satisfied with the movie even before that, but yeah.

And holy fucking shit, Guardians of the Galaxy has made over 550 million worldwide! Amazing! I hope it'll hit the 600M mark since then it'll be at least within sprinting distance of the other Phase 2 films that didn't perform as well as IM3. I also have some questions for everyone but I don't think there's a way to make a poll that would cover all of them so I'll just ask them here:

1. Do you think that the negative reaction to Iron Man 3 is the reason why the other Phase 2 films did not earn anywhere close to what Iron Man 3 earned?
2. Do you think post-credits scenes should depict possible future events or just add a supplemental humorous or more closure-oriented feeling?
3. Do you feel that Green Lantern should be included (at least partially) in the now-expanding DC cinematic universe since his film came before Man of Steel?

[Vorian]

1. Do you think that the negative reaction to Iron Man 3 is the reason why the other Phase 2 films did not earn anywhere close to what Iron Man 3 earned?

Seems likely. I know I initially skipped Thor 2 because of it and only gave the Winter Soldier a chance because I really liked what I was seeing and hearing about it.

2. Do you think post-credits scenes should depict possible future events or just add a supplemental humorous or more closure-oriented feeling?

More to tease future events or provide closure, I think. Guardian's of the Galaxy's was kinda a waste in my opinion.

3. Do you feel that Green Lantern should be included (at least partially) in the now-expanding DC cinematic universe since his film came before Man of Steel?

Frankly I don't even think Man of Steel should be included in the DC movie 'verse, it makes even Iron Man 3 look good by comparison. It's not even that it's a bad Superman movie - it's one of the worst movies I've ever seen, period. But it's done, so moving on - I don't think the Green Lantern movie really fits the tone set by Man of Steel.

[Top Cat]

More to tease future events or provide closure, I think. Guardian's of the Galaxy's was kinda a waste in my opinion.

Actually... it may not be. It requires some twisted thinking, but the Howard the Duck post-credit can possibly be a hint at a future movie: Deadpool.

When the Deadpool game was announced at the San Diego Comic Con 2012, they made it a silly spectacle - they started the panel by announcing a Howard the Duck game (which got very strong cheering), before Deadpool* broke into the panel and announced that they were actually making the Deadpool game (complete with the announcement trailer). Here's the video of that panel.

It's been known that Marvel has wanted to make a Deadpool movie for some time, but they've been a little shy about making an R-rated movie. But Deadpool has never been stronger than he is right now, and they know that the window of opportunity won't last forever. They also know that trying to make a Deadpool movie to stay within PG-13 guides would be considered "terrible" by a lot of the fans. So there's definitely some inertia into making that movie, and making it R-rated.

Now, I'm sure you've since heard about the (3-year-old) Deadpool Movie Trailer that was leaked. It happened to be leaked on the same day that Guardians of the Galaxy was released. I don't think that's a coincidence. I think that "Howard the Duck" is Marvel's wink-and-nod for Deadpool now.

*Someone dressed and acting as Deadpool, of course.

[Vorian]

Actually... it may not be. It requires some twisted thinking, but the Howard the Duck post-credit can possibly be a hint at a future movie: Deadpool.

There's a big problem with that: Fox still has the rights to Deadpool. Which means even if a Deadpool movie is coming, it won't be MCU and I don't see Marvel doing anything to promote it.

[Top Cat]

There's a big problem with that: Fox still has the rights to Deadpool. Which means even if a Deadpool movie is coming, it won't be MCU and I don't see Marvel doing anything to promote it.

That's not a big problem, as far as they're concerned. Marvel can either work with Fox, or buy back the rights. When money is the only problem, it's not much of a problem.

[Vorian]

That's not a big problem, as far as they're concerned. Marvel can either work with Fox, or buy back the rights. When money is the only problem, it's not much of a problem.

Oh, it's not a problem as far as Fox making the movie goes, necessarily. But it's a big problem for the plausibility of Marvel having anything to do with it in any way, particularly as bad as relations between the two have been lately. I don't get the feeling Fox is looking to sell, either.

[Slywyn]

The Guardians of the Galaxy end credits scene was to show Doctor Strange's cocoon had opened.

Howard the Duck was a red herring.

[TheGlyphstone]

Adam Warlock, not Doctor Strange.