Comments on: Spider-Man 4′s Lone Villain is The Lizard?

By: RednBlue4Ever

RednBlue4Ever — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 08:35:29 +0000

I hope they do only have one villain and that the rumors of that villain being the lizard is true.

By: edwardzarnawski

edwardzarnawski — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 23:31:17 +0000

The Goblin thing has been done. Twice! Although I think that the Hobgoblin character is very cool, going to that well again is redundant. I agree that the “emo Peter” was ridiculous. Keeping the story tight and uncomplicated would do wonders for this franchise. You can have more than one villain, you just have to allow some room for each of the characters to develop. It seemed to me that Spider-Man 3 was rushed and cluttered. I also agree that the Lizard may be too close to the Doc Ock story. They will definateley have to up the ante. Setting up future villains in this film is the way to go. Introduce Felicia Hardy, but hold off on the turn to Black Cat until part 5. Bring in Quentin Beck or Max Dillon or Adrian Toomes, but don't have them transform into their respective alter-egos until the next film( the end of $ at the earliest).

By: Matt Mosley

Matt Mosley — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:16:13 +0000

Spidy, Kraven and Black Cat :)

By: Peter Glass

Peter Glass — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:51:09 +0000

The villains of Spider-Man 4-6 are said to be The Lizard Mysterio Kraven The Hunter Hammerhead Carnage and Electro

By: Scott_G

Scott_G — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:55:02 +0000

I'm excited about seeing new villian's in the next movies. The Lizard in #4, possible appearance by Mysterio? That would be cool. In Spiderman 5,6 I read that Electro and The Vulture will appear as part of the Sinister Six. Excellent.

By: kcj506

kcj506 — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 08:08:17 +0000

SM3's problem wasn't because of "too many villains". It was bad writing. Plain and simple. What did "emo" Peter Parker arguably everyone's least favorite part of the film--have to do with the villains? What was wrong with Venom wasn't the choice of character or even actor, but the way the character was presented.

Instead of focusing on the villains they had useless things such as Peter dancing and singing, the MJ and Harry cooking thing and other unnecessary stuff.

I think of the Lizard was the sole villain it would be too similar to SM2. Octavius was Peter's friend and then an accident turn him into a monster and at the end he was redeemed. In short: a good doctor, who is Peter's friend and mentor turns into a monster and Spider-Man must stop him, but somehow not hurt his friend.

This story might work with fanboys but the GA most likely will not accept it. It would feel as the same story told with only different characters, and Spidey definitely needs something fresh now, something new.

Plus it would mean yet another sympathetic villain. I know it's inevitable with the Lizard. That's why I want another villain to go along with him.

IMO not very many of Spidey's foes are complex enough to carry a two-hour movie on their own. In fact, I think only GG and Doc Ock can.

By: joe

joe — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:28:27 +0000

my exposure to spiderman was the cartoon, and in the cartoon the lizard was very lame. like a very campy werewolf like someone comented.

for my money it has to be HOBGOBLIN TIME

they did the goblin great in the first film, so do the samething the comic book did after they kil it off and decide not to keep putting harry threw the whole deal. just bring up some other dude that decides to go goblin on things

By: joe

joe — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 23:19:03 +0000

my exposure to spiderman was the cartoon, and in the cartoon the lizard was very lame. like a very campy werewolf like someone comented.

for my money it has to be HOBGOBLIN TIME

By: edwardzarnawski

edwardzarnawski — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:09:56 +0000

I agree that Bruce Campbell should not be cast as Kraven but Sam Raimi may want to portray that character as a cunning and wiley hunter instead of the dark brooding killer that we know from the comics. Oded Fehr is a good choice for the more traditional portrayal of Kraven. While it would be nice if there was a way to go back to the third film and fix all of the problems it's not going to happen, so we'll have to accept it and move on. The Venom spin-off is also a good way to disperse the ideas being juggled by the writers of the fourth film and potentially ruining this installment as well. Hopefully they can tell a good story and maybe introduce a few new characters (potential villains) for further sequels.

By: edwardzarnawski

edwardzarnawski — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 13:09:56 +0000

By: hempknight757

hempknight757 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:37:20 +0000

I think with Kraven the Hunter & The Lizard would be perfect because its diff. than most mutiple villians films. In that The Lizard is a man torn & can't control himself. Have Kraven the Hunter after both of them because they would both be big game for a hunter like him. I think they should just remake the 3rd one. Not kill Harry, give Venom a minor role. Because the movie just moved so fast you never knew what was going on with each villian.

By: hempknight757

hempknight757 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:33:25 +0000

Wrong! It doesn't have to be a single villian you just have to do it the right way like TDK. Since the old garb Batman movies everyone is so afraid of mutiple villian films & all Spiderman 4 do is make them say is see look at how that turned out. As far as my boy Bruce def. not Craven the Hunter maybe in his prime he could have. The best choice for that is Oded Fehr from the Mummy & Resident Evil films. He looks perfect for the role. As far as Bruce he is a great choice for Mysterio maybe set his role up in this for the 5 installment.

By: edwardzarnawski

edwardzarnawski — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:56:56 +0000

A single villain film is the only way to go ( we all saw how horribly awry part three went with not one, not two but THREE villains!)If done right this installment could be every bit as good as the first two. Dylan Baker has certainly put in the time and backstory for the character. Bringing in a new villain at the close of this film would work (maybe Bruce Campbell as Mysterio,Kraven or Chameleon!) As far as Maguire and Dunst may only be in it for the money but on some level they are appeasing fans as well, so I'm all for their return.

By: facebook-1190955934

facebook-1190955934 — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:52:15 +0000

bruce campbell needs to play kraven the hunter. kraven comes to new york to hunt spiderman, but shifts his focus to the lizard. so spidey has to turn conners back to normal, and protect him from kraven at the same time

By: chille

chille — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:08:42 +0000

This is good news, but Bruce needs a big role. And we all know if he doesn't in this installment, he probably never will.

By: sarasorrentino

sarasorrentino — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:52:42 +0000

I don't think I can trust this franchise after what they did to me last time. It hurt too much. We all know Maguire and Dunst don't even like the Spiderman movies, so they are solely doing it for the money. Without dedicated actors, this will never be as good as Iron Man and TDK.

By: Matt Cohen

Matt Cohen — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:29:27 +0000

I like the idea of having one villain but I'm not sure The Lizard is a strong enough villain to stand on his own. What about Bruce Campbell? If there is only one villain who will he be playing?

By: Peter Donohue

Peter Donohue — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:25:57 +0000

The Lizard is a great villian, sort of like a reptilian werewolf. Hopefully this can be as good as Spiderman 2, but only if they don't overblow it. AND KEEP UNCLE BEN OUT OF IT! HES DEAD FOR CRISESAKES!

By: Christopher_M

Christopher_M — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 00:36:29 +0000

I like the idea of only having one major villain…too many villains can make for a bloated movie…I think when Raimi said he was going back to basics he's going to keep things simple…having the Lizard would be perfect it could end up being as solid as the second film if done properly…