• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sony Spider-Verse discussion thread

JD said:
So I wonder if Mysterio will wear the fishbowl? I'm thinking since we have a potential big name actor like Gyllenhall we'll see his face at some point. Has Mysterio ever show his face in the comics?
Click to expand...
Turtletrekker said:
I'm sure that the fishbowl will be alluded to at the very, very least. Just like how Adrian Toomes flight jacket in Homecoming alluded to the tuft of feathers around Toomes neck in the comics.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I imagine they'll go with practicality over style for his costume design, as they've done with most of the heroes and villains. What they could do is have him wear the full fishbowl costume as part of the Quentin Beck origin story as a special effects stunt man, but then switch to something more practical when he becomes Mysterio. I do hope he keeps the eyes as part of his cape attachment (I'm sure they have a name but I have no idea) in his final costume appearance.
 
Last edited:
JD said:
So I wonder if Mysterio will wear the fishbowl? I'm thinking since we have a potential big name actor like Gyllenhall we'll see his face at some point. Has Mysterio ever show his face in the comics?
Click to expand...

There have been at least three Mysterios by this point (Quentin Beck, Daniel Berkhart, and Francis Klum), and we've seen all of them unmasked or out of costume at some point.
 
Mysterio has been my #1 Spider-Man villain to see in a film for years, but no fishbowl would make the whole thing pointless. Not that he has to wear it all the time obviously, but if it wasn't part of his villain get up then I'd rather they just not have him in the movie. If they use him, and have his villain costume retain its iconic elements even if its a bit more "realistic", then that would be one of the few things that would make me interested in a Homecoming sequel, since I thought that the original was just garbage.
 
Emh said:
Yeah, I imagine they'll go with practicality over style for his costume design, as they've done with most of the heroes and villains. What they could do is have him wear the full fishbowl costume as part of the Quentin Beck origin story as a special effects stunt man, but then switch to something more practical when he becomes Mysterio. I do hope he keeps the eyes as part of his cape attachment (I'm sure they have a name but I have no idea) in his final costume appearance.
Click to expand...
I could see that working. Even if it's just a quick blink and you miss it easter egg, Marvel has still been pretty good about finding ways to work the iconic elements of the characters into the movies.
 
JD said:
I could see that working. Even if it's just a quick blink and you miss it easter egg, Marvel has still been pretty good about finding ways to work the iconic elements of the characters into the movies.
Click to expand...
The Winter Soldier is a good example. Both Batroc and Zola differed in appearance from their comic counterparts, but there were just enough elements of their comics look to pay homage to them without dipping into silliness. A villain wearing a fish bowl on his head for the whole movie? That would be dipping into silliness.
 
Yeah, how dare a superhero movie be a bit silly. Especially Spider-Man, the most deadly serious superhero in the genre. Someone call Zach Snyder, we must make sure nothing that is fun or a bit silly shows up in the movie about a whiny teenager who puts on a colorful costume to beat up supervillains. Next, they'll be wanting a talking Racoon or Jeff Goldbloom in a Marvel movie. :vulcan:
 
The problem with Batroc wasn't that they changed his appearance, it's that they changed his entire personality. They kept the savate fighting style but nothing else. They took a fun anti-villain who fights for the thrill and adventure and doesn't kill and turned him into a murderous mercenary.
 
kirk55555 said:
Yeah, how dare a superhero movie be a bit silly. Especially Spider-Man, the most deadly serious superhero in the genre. Someone call Zach Snyder, we must make sure nothing that is fun or a bit silly shows up in the movie about a whiny teenager who puts on a colorful costume to beat up supervillains. Next, they'll be wanting a talking Racoon or Jeff Goldbloom in a Marvel movie. :vulcan:
Click to expand...
There's a big difference between things being a bit silly and being fucking ridiculous, but where that line is tends to be up to personal taste. With comics adaptations you have to be very careful how you handle some of the sillier things to keep from crossing that line. So far Marvel has managed to keep things on the right side of it, for me at least. Rocket and Groot are a perfect example of what I'm talking about, they had to potential to be a completely fucking ridiculous disaster, but thanks to the James Gunn's co-writing and directing, and Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel's performances they managed to pull them off spectacularly.
Mysterio's comics costume is kind of borderline for me, it's one of those things that works in the comics, but I'm not sure how good it would look in live action without some pretty major changes.
 
JD said:
There's a big difference between things being a bit silly and being fucking ridiculous, but where that line is tends to be up to personal taste. With comics adaptations you have to be very careful how you handle some of the sillier things to keep from crossing that line. So far Marvel has managed to keep things on the right side of it, for me at least.
Click to expand...

I would've agreed with you before yesterday, but yesterday I finally saw Thor: Ragnarok. That one crossed the line and made things too silly -- and worse, it failed to give any real emotional weight or impact to the things that were supposed to be serious, something that other comedy-oriented Marvel films have still managed to do. It just seemed to put a token effort into the serious things because it was more interested in getting on to the next goofy bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kor
Without the goofiness, Ragnarok would have been Mad Max in space and it would have sucked. The Dark World showed that a course correction for the franchise was desperately needed.
 
Turtletrekker said:
Without the goofiness, Ragnarok would have been Mad Max in space and it would have sucked.
Click to expand...

As I said, the problem wasn't just the goofiness, it's that the director only seemed interested in the goofiness so that the serious stuff had no emotional weight or impact. There was a ton of dark, tragic stuff going on here, and it didn't feel like it mattered because the characters just looked mildly miffed about it for a moment and then went back to goofy gags and quips. Marvel's other comedy-oriented films have managed to create a sense of real emotional stakes to their more serious elements, but this film didn't seem to care. It was an adequately entertaining bit of comedy fluff, but it felt empty and pointless in retrospect, which is a problem given the monumentally transformative things that happened in it.
 
The only time the goofiness bothered me was Korg's line while they were watching Asgard get destroyed. Otherwise I thought they really nailed the humor.
 
Skywalker said:
The only time the goofiness bothered me was Korg's line while they were watching Asgard get destroyed. Otherwise I thought they really nailed the humor.
Click to expand...

The only thing that bothered me was that whole "Meiks dead" thing at the end. It just wasn't funny.
 
I just saw a report on a comment from Kevin Feige that clarified a point of personal confusion I had: how to reconcile Sony's publicly stated desire to have a Trilogy of solo Spider-Man films featuring Peter Parker as a high-school student with statements that the second installment of that Trilogy would be set after the events of Avengers 4.

According to what I read, Feige said that SMH 2 - and by retroactive extension Infinity War and Avengers 4 - will feature Peter as a high-school Junior, which 'locks' both SMH2 and Avengers 4 into a setting of either 2018 or their year of release, 2019.
 
I can't see there being to big of a gap between Infinity War and A4, so I'm not surprised.
 
Don't know why this needs to be animated. They could continue the ASM movies, with the MCU ones. Perhaps make a 2099 movie and then do a proper Spider-Verse movie. Maybe Tobey's Spider-Man will be the leader and has his daughter, May as Spider-Girl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top