Marvel Cinematic Universe

But one shouldn't overdo it. The Ultimate Spider-Man Cartoon is a perfect example of when such comedic things become 'too much'.

Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian

This is just me, but I could live without the costume. That's just personal preference. I've always found Norman Osborn to be a much scarier and more intimidating villain than the Green Goblin. For basically the same reason as the "Bruce Wayne could do so many things but instead wastes his wealth to drive a cool car around and beat up the poor and disabled" critique.

Norman Osborn has nearly limitless capacity as a villain. His wealth, power, and influence makes him an extremely viable storytelling engine. The Spectacular cartoon had him using Oscorp as a supervillain factory. The comics had him leading the Thunderbolts and politically maneuvering to take control of S.H.I.E.L.D. Many adaptations like to lump in Spider-Man's origin with Osborn's R&D. There's just so much a rich and powerful person can do, and much of it is even legal. There's a reason Superman's most iconic villain is Lex Luthor.

The Green Goblin, by contrast, flies around on a hoverboard and throws hand grenades at people. Just seems like a waste of a perfectly dangerous archnemesis. I like Osborn better when he's Luthor than when he's the Joker.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 21st 2019 at 8:46:43 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Flying around on a hoverboard throwing grenades sounds like a perfectly dangerous arch-nemesis.

And having Kingpin around would make Norman being the evil businessman redundant.

Edited by Soble on Sep 21st 2019 at 7:53:10 AM

I'M MR. MEESEEKS, LOOK AT ME!

No, a guy on a hoverboard throwing hand grenades is a normal day in the life of a superhero. That is several degrees of magnitude less threatening. Let's use Obadiah Stane for comparison.

Obadiah Stane, the billionaire war profiteer, spent years, maybe decades selling illegal weapons under the table. It was a very profitable enterprise that resulted in a great deal of terrible human catastrophe. Countless lives were destroyed that can be pegged back to Stane.

Obadiah Stane, the Iron Monger, spent about five minutes terrorizing a highway once. Then Pepper Potts blew him the f*ck up. Now he's dead forever.

Stane did significantly more damage outside the suit than he ever could have done with it. Because once he put on the suit, he just became a supervillain bad guy for a superhero to beat up. Stane himself knew this; he only climbed into the Iron Monger out of desperation after his real villainy came crumbling down around him.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 21st 2019 at 8:56:30 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Last we saw of Kingpin he was arrested for blackmail and murder. Not to mention he's never appeared in the MCU movies so Norman doesn't have to worry about Fisk making him redundant.

Something I noticed is that every time Tony selling weapons got brought up in the MCU, no one mentioed Stane's involvement in SI's under-the-table dealings. In some way, Stane got the last laugh as Tony had to repeatedly fight against the damage Stane did to his reputation up until his death.

So he did.

Though to be fair, Tony himself was making and selling the weapons; Stane just sold them to people he wasn't supposed to. Plus Tony's personality probably either makes people doubt he really didn't know, or just makes them want to take him down a peg. The fact that he himself treats Stane's actions as being his own fault doesn't help.

One Strip! One Strip!

I could see the MCU bringing Norman as more of non-superpowered threat who's dangerous because of his connections and vast resources. It'd be something to differentiate him from the Raimi films (and the Webb films, who's only contribution was to get sick and die), and offered a different kind of threat for Spidey to face. Maybe they could've brought the Goblin persona some point down the line, but I think the MCU doesn't want to retread worn ground.

Of course, as I said before, it's a moot point now.

It is a moot point now. But fun to think about.

I've always been kinda sad that Marvel wasted the Iron Patriot suit on Iron Man 3. The Thunderbolts -> Hammer rendition of Osborn was my favorite version of the character.

When Thunderbolts was reimagined as a government-run work-release program for super-criminals, Osborn was tasked with being in charge of it. He used the team as a stepping stone to maneuver for political power. After a long journey of twists, turns, provings, and cover-ups, Osborn's "great work" ultimately landed him a job as Director of S.H.I.E.L.D. after the Secret Invasion disgraced the former director, Tony Stark.

He then rebranded his own version of S.H.I.E.L.D., H.A.M.M.E.R., and as insult to injury, acquired one of Stark's suits for himself. As the Iron Patriot, Osborn pretty much became the king of law enforcement through both H.A.M.M.E.R. and his own version of the Avengers, bringing about the aptly titled "Dark Reign" period.

Throughout all of this, the Green Goblin was portrayed as a potentially dangerous character flaw. It was presented as a mental illness Osborn had to struggle to keep in control, lest it thoroughly undermine everything he was trying to accomplish. He knew that the moment he snaps and starts lobbing bombs at banks while screaming about Spider-Man, that's it. Game over. Stick a fork in him, he's done.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 21st 2019 at 9:32:45 AM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

The whole Dark Reign was stupid from start to finish.

The mere thought of both the Government AND the public willingly giving basically limitless power to a bunch of well-known sociopathic mass murderers was just utterly ridiculous.

Hell Spidey even lampshaded it.

Edited by Forenperser on Sep 21st 2019 at 5:59:52 PM

Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian

The same government and populace that continually goes to bat for building mutant hunting giant robots who VERY NOTABLY went renegade in the first minute they were turned on?

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

Point taken but there is a difference between being ruthless and stupidly self-destructive.

Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% Scandinavian

Well, considering how much our real-life government lets slip awful shit like gun-toting murderers (among a LOT of other things), I guess, quoth Thanos, reality is often disappointing. And just as maddeningly ridiculous and stupid as in fiction.

Edited by AyyItsMidnight on Sep 21st 2019 at 9:05:10 AM

Self-serious autistic metalhead who goes by any pronouns. (avvie template source)

I’d argue that in the case of the Sentinels it’s both

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

Been on a binge of watching xmen videos on youtube I've been wondering how Apocalypse would be interpreted in the MCU,we've seen how different Thanos's backstory was,his range of powers were nerfed considerably and his obsession with Lady death was dropped was but how would Apocalypse be different?

I don't see anything in Apocalypse's backstory that's too problematic,but they're really going to need a different approach so people don't draw comparisons with the Fox films,which is to say,stick with him being mutant terminator like the source and cartoons did,also the A on his costume needs to still prominent because thats a really funny detail

New theme music also a box

It’s important in case he ever forgets his name

Forever liveblogging the Avengers

He wanted to be Captain Apocalypse, but everyone kept laughing at him.

Oh God! Natural light!

I don't have high standards, I just know bad parenting when I see it. I mean, fuck it, my dad never said to me, "You could have been so much better, but instead you decided to get a degree in Creative Writing and now you work in an accounting department of a mid-level law firm" and hell, my dad once forced his kids to work so hard one summer, he called it the "Summer of Pain" (and the next summer was called "Summer of Pain 2: Summer of Hell"). But my dad also knows that ignoring what your kid actually is saying and instead imposing what you want them to be is being a shitty dad.

(Perhaps it was because my grandfather wanted my dad to be a doctor and tried to insist that he become one, even though my dad never wanted that, but my dad never forced his children to be or do anything that they didn't want to do. That is being a good dad.)

This isn't Tough Love, this is ignoring what your child is actually saying to you. Once again, Harry says that the private schools "weren't for him," and Norman completely ignores that, saying "Of course they were." It clear that Harry is happier in public school, but Norman doesn't care. Because Norman never concerns himself with Harry's happiness.

Because Norma is a shitty dad.

Edited by alliterator on Sep 21st 2019 at 10:46:26 AM

Well, that depends on whether you feel Harry is being truthful there. Is it that there was actually something about the private schools which made him deeply unhappy compared to public schooling? Or is it that he's an underachiever, and has only settled on public school because there he can let his grades fall as low as he wants and they won't kick him out?

"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko

Never get rid of the beloved costume.

Your not a true super villain without it. Theatricality is most important.

"I am Alpharius. This is a lie."

There is no indication that Harry is lying. In fact, he decides in that conversation that his dad won't understand (which he doesn't) and cuts himself off.

There is no indication he is telling the truth either. It's not like we saw what those private schools were like. Later dialogue with Peter:

Peter: Some spiders change colors to blend into their environment. It's a defense mechanism.

Harry: Peter, what makes you think I'd want to know that?

Judging by this conversation, his "yeah, right" comment when Norman asks what he was doing at the library and the fact he tries to use Peter's fun fact about spiders to impress MJ, I think it's safe to say Norman wasn't off the money about criticizing Harry for not taking his academics seriously.

Assuming someone is lying based on nothing at all is the pinnacle of cynicism.

Also, even though Harry says that, he actually remembers that fact and uses it to try and impress MJ, like you said. Which means that he does actually remember stuff, he just was being snarky to Peter.

"Being snarky to his friends" =/= "being a total slacker." There is no indication he gets bad grades.

In any case, that also doesn't change the fact that Norman Osborn is a shitty dad. Which he is.

Edited by alliterator on Sep 21st 2019 at 11:25:32 AM

What's more, in a narrative, a character who delivers a line without any indication (either at the time or later on) that they're being untruthful should be taken to be telling the truth, because that's the point of dialogue.

Characters don't lie without indication in stories. If a character was lying, the audience would at least eventually know it for sure unless it's supposed to be unclear - and if that's the case the writer would make that unclearness clear (if that makes any sense) instead.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Sep 21st 2019 at 11:30:52 AM

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.

There's every indication that Harry wasn't happy at those private schools, but that he's happy now because he's friends with Peter and MJ. But Norman doesn't care about his actual happiness, which makes him a shitty dad.

Also, the Goblin is a part of Norman. He isn't just something that was made up by the Goblin formula, the formula only brought it to the surface, like Jekyll and Hyde. When the Goblin does something, it's something that Norman himself, deep down, really wanted to do.

When Harry becomes the next Green Goblin, he ends up not doing the same things and ends up actually becoming heroic, because he's not like his father.

Edited by alliterator on Sep 21st 2019 at 11:31:44 AM

Hot take: Harry and Norman are both kinda shitty. Harry's an underachiever who can't be arsed to apply himself and has failed out of multiple private schools - which is, itself, kind of an accomplishment. He's such a terrible student that he has been repeatedly kicked out of institutions whose only criteria for being there is "My dad paid $10 million for you to enroll me."

Harry's a bad son.

Norman, meanwhile, is a condescending asshole whose stern and dispassionate treatment of his child is the entire reason Harry becomes a "Well Done, Son" Guy in pretty much every appearance the character's ever made. He's a father more concerned with how Harry reflects him than with Harry's happiness and wellbeing. He sees Harry as an extension of the Norman Osborn Legacy, nothing more.

Norman's a bad father.

These types of discussions have a bad habit of devolving into arguments about "Which shitty person do you, personally, relate to the most?" Harry's shittiness does not absolve Norman, nor does Norman's shittiness absolve Harry. Rather, their mutual shittiness acts as a feedback loop, each one making the other worse and worse.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Sep 21st 2019 at 12:42:54 PM

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.