Thomas Haden Church cast as villain for Spider-Man

[Vyce 0]

(but still doing the bridge conundrum)?

The what?

He's referring to the part of the first film in which the Goblin tosses Mary Jane off of the bridge (and gives Spider-Man the choice of saving her or saving a group of New Yorkers), which any modest Spider-Man fan can tell you is an aping of the landmark Spidey issue in which Gwen Stacy dies (same deal, she gets thrown off the bridge, but Gwen didn't wind up so fortunate).

[Ravenbomb 0]

oh

[notJames 0]

Can't remember where I read this, but take it with a grain of salt or two:

 

There are supposedly two villains in Spider-Man 3: Man-Wolf (J. Jonah Jameson's son) and Venom. My guess is Church plays Venom.

[starvenger 0]

Well, they've linked the two before in the cartoon, but there's just no way they could do what I think they want to do in a two hour movie. They'd have to do a Kill Bill and split it into two parts...

[Secret Agent 0]

Uh, unless Sony recently bought the rights someone else (Fox, new Line, etc, I don't remember who.)already owns the movie rights on Venom. Something that was done during all the time Spiderman was in development hell. Meaning Sony couldn't use Venom.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Isn't New Line the production company for Spider-Man...?

[Vyce 0]

Why do people want Venom now?

 

I MUCH prefer a slow build towards Venom. I'd rather see Eddy Brock be introduced in the third film (or the fourth, whatever), and have his hatred for Parker develop over the course of at least one movie before Venom comes into the picture.

 

Why rush things? There are a TON of Spider-Man villains to go through before they should even go to Venom. I'd have no problem with Church portraying Sandman, or Electro, or Scorpion, etc.

[caboose 0]

Multiple bad guy scenarios suck on film unless you have mulitple good guys.

 

Casual fans will want to see the conclusion of Peter-Harry in Spider-Man III, anything else and a lot of casual fans will be pissed. Granted Spider-Man films may be successful catering to the comic book fans but Sony needs the casual film-goers just as much.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Multiple villains can work depending on how they are used. For example, there is nothing wrong with henchmen (think James Bond). But there should only be one clear cut main villain.

[caboose 0]

Which is the point I tried to make. Thanks for clearing it up a bit. However, a new villain playing second fiddle to GG2 or another new villain may backfire in the face of Sony. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin being the main examples.

[Guest Brian]

Couldn't they hold off on Harry/Peter showdown by having Harry hire henchmen, and then push GG2 in say, the next Spiderman? Assuming they push for a fourth with the same cast.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Couldn't they hold off on Harry/Peter showdown by having Harry hire henchmen, and then push GG2 in say, the next Spiderman? Assuming they push for a fourth with the same cast.

I could see it. Have Harry refuse to turn into the Goblin and try to do things his own way, but as he fails he goes slowly more insane and eventually just gives in and becomes the Goblin himself. I think you could drag it to the 4th movie, but after that is pushing it.

[Guest El Satanico]

The cartoons are able to make two villians work, so there's no reason why a movie can't.

 

Batman Begins has like 5 villians of various degrees. Batman Returns dealt with two villians well. Batman Forever and Batman & Robin didn't do a good job.

[Black Lushus 0]

has anyone else heard that they also want to have Black Cat in this thing? Man this movie is gonna suck...

[Crimson Platypus 0]

Couldn't they hold off on Harry/Peter showdown by having Harry hire henchmen, and then push GG2 in say, the next Spiderman? Assuming they push for a fourth with the same cast.

I could see it. Have Harry refuse to turn into the Goblin and try to do things his own way, but as he fails he goes slowly more insane and eventually just gives in and becomes the Goblin himself. I think you could drag it to the 4th movie, but after that is pushing it.

My memory could be off a bit here but orginally didn't JJJ hire Scorpion to kill Spidey? If so then they could bend that a bit to Harry hiring Church as Scorpion, and when he fails show Harry at the end of the film standing in front of that big mirror (repaired) that Dafoe was talking to himself in, and have Harry mimic the big scary grin that Dafoe had be the last thing the viewer sees.

[caboose 0]

Seriously though, casual fans that Sony needs to make Spider-Man III successful will not go see it if Harry Osbourne is not promoted as Green Goblin II. The average cinema goer wants to see things tied up neatly. If GG2 is delayed until Spider-Man IV (without Maguire, Raimi and Dunst), Sony can kiss the casual viewers of Spider-Man goodbye.

 

Batman Returns worked because the bad guys, Penguin and Schrek were being chased by essentially two good guys, Batman and Catwoman.

 

Spider-Man III could work with two bad guys if they paint Harry as a confused tweener and Church as whoever getting disposed fairly early.

[caboose 0]

If so then they could bend that a bit to Harry hiring Church as Scorpion, and when he fails show Harry at the end of the film standing in front of that big mirror (repaired) that Dafoe was talking to himself in, and have Harry mimic the big scary grin that Dafoe had be the last thing the viewer sees.

You can't tease Harry as Goblin two films in a row. It's not like wrestling where you tease a turn for months like Batista. There would be 4-6 years between Spider-Man II and Spider-Man IV, it would kill the interest.

[starvenger 0]

If so then they could bend that a bit to Harry hiring Church as Scorpion, and when he fails show Harry at the end of the film standing in front of that big mirror (repaired) that Dafoe was talking to himself in, and have Harry mimic the big scary grin that Dafoe had be the last thing the viewer sees.

You can't tease Harry as Goblin two films in a row. It's not like wrestling where you tease a turn for months like Batista. There would be 4-6 years between Spider-Man II and Spider-Man IV, it would kill the interest.

I think you can spread it out over a few films as long as Harry is the guy pulling the strings of the Scorpion, Sandman or whoever. But it is a fine line between pissing the audience off, and leaving them wanting more.

[BlackFlagg 0]

http://www.superherohype.com/news/spider-mannews.php?id=3245

[The Mandarin 0]

You know, multiple villains can be added to the movie and they don't even have to have backstories.

 

It could be kind of like a filler scene where Spider-Man kicks a random criminal's ass, except the random criminal could be the Vulture, or Sandman or some shit.

 

You know, like-

 

"Bag up the money boys, and we'll transport these greens back to the nest."

"Not today, Vulture. You're headed for the slammer."

"Fuck you, Spider! Ka-pow to your face!"

 

And then they fight. Throw two or three of those in the movie, a main plot and some T&A, and it will still work.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

You know, multiple villains can be added to the movie and they don't even have to have backstories.

 

It could be kind of like a filler scene where Spider-Man kicks a random criminal's ass, except the random criminal could be the Vulture, or Sandman or some shit.

 

You know, like-

 

"Bag up the money boys, and we'll transport these greens back to the nest."

"Not today, Vulture. You're headed for the slammer."

"Fuck you, Spider! Ka-pow to your face!"

 

And then they fight. Throw two or three of those in the movie, a main plot and some T&A, and it will still work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The only way I like that kind of scenario is if either (using the Vulture as an example):

 

A. The Vulture then comes back badder, stronger, in the next film.

 

or

 

B. The Vulture is his whipping boy, Spidey beats his ass again in much the same manner in the next film.

 

I personally don't like using the Vulture for option B because they could use his life draining/aging weapon very well with the current state of special effects (think T3 but with aging). It would work well using option A if they showed Vulture either at the end of the film, or the beginning of the next purchasing the previously mentioned weapon (or parts for it, not mentioning what the weapon does).

[Black Lushus 0]

you know, i never really ranked Vulture very high in the Spidey villian hierarchy...I'm almost positive we'd see a Venom storyline before we saw a Vulture storyline...I really don't see him being more than a secondary villian or at least on a tag team with another secondary villian...

 

now that I think about, Spidey really did have some subpar villians to deal with in the grand scheme of things in the Marvel Universe...Venom, Carnage, the Goblins and Octopus are the only ones that I'd call major league...and even they aren't on Doctor Doom, Red Skull, Magneto, Apocalypse, Thanos, etc. levels...

[Crimson Platypus 0]

[Black Lushus 0]

good lord, who was that?

[Slayer 0]

Re: GG2. I, for one, don't want to see another movie of Spiderman versus a GG of any sort. I could only see it having a "been there, done that" feel when they fight, the only difference being another guy under the GG mask

[Guest SpiderFan]

good lord, who was that?

 

Tarantula

[pochorenella 0]

That's the Tarantula. He's an ok villain, I guess.

 

And I know that I might be opening a can of worms here, (then again, this isn't the Comic Books Folder) but Spidey has the absolute best rogues gallery in all of comicdom. Yes, even better than Batman's or Flash's, but they're all Top 3 and interchangeable depending on your hero taste. With Spidey you don't need Magnetos or Apocalypses, that's why guys like Vulture, Sandman and the like play so well with him.

 

Edit: Beat to it by Spider-Fan.

[Guest Prodigy]

From Lying in the Gutters :

 

CHURCH AND GRACE

 

[Green Light]It's already been established that Thomas Hayden Church is playing Chameleon in the next Spider-Man movie. So which villain is Topher Grace, also cast, playing? Especially considering Sam Raimi's statement, "Topher Grace is an extraordinarily talented actor and will be perfect for the complexities of the role we are developing."

 

Again with the spoiler space for you timid types. No I mean it, this is plot-twist spoiler stuff here. Dear me, we're going through it today.

 

Chameleon is also being played by Topher Grace. There will be a big reveal half way through Spider-Man 3 that they're the same person, as Grace's character gets close to Mary Jane.

 

Back to your unsullied Spider-Man 3 viewpoint with you!

 

 

 

Wow. That's pretty cool. I can't believe I never thought of this.

[SuperJerk 0]

Chameleon is also being played by Topher Grace. There will be a big reveal half way through Spider-Man 3 that they're the same person, as Grace's character gets close to Mary Jane.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Worked in Batman Begins.

[starvenger 0]

Chameleon is also being played by Topher Grace. There will be a big reveal half way through Spider-Man 3 that they're the same person, as Grace's character gets close to Mary Jane.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Worked in Batman Begins.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Makes sense. I'm waiting for Knowles to denounce Rich Johnston as a liar and friend of Mark Millar. Or something.