Villain Poll

[The Overlord]

I thought I would start a poll about who people want to be the villain in the next Fantastic Four movie. I am curious whether people will want Dr. Doom right away or whether they think he should be saved for another movie. I also think it would be fun to discuss which FF villains would work best for a first movie of a new FF movie series.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I'm not going to vote on this poll. Because Doom should definitely be involved, primary villain or not. But it also totally depends on who they cast and how they go about presenting the movie.

I'm curious to say the least, but very VERY skeptical.

 

[Silvermoth]

Don't start off with a big gun like Doom or Galactus straight away. Learn from Batman and Superman, start with a cool villain which won't get too much in the way of the team dynamic than bring in the big gun for a sequel to tear everything apart.

So I voted Annhilius. He would work well as a villain and as a visual and he can be easily slotted into the origin story.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

If I were to suggest something, I'd say the following could be an interesting trilogy:

film #1: FF explore the Negative Zone resulting in the acquisition of their abilities. Victor Von Doom traps them there out of hatred for Reed. Attempting escape leads them to confrontation with Annihilus.
film #2: FF explore Subterranea at the films opening and end up fighting off Moloids/Giganto. All the while they are under the planet's surface, Dr. Doom enacts plans for global domination. They continue on to Latveria where they do battle with Doom and his minions.
film #3: FF explore a nearby solar system after the discovery of radical cosmic anomalies. On the way to investigate, they encounter and must fend off an army of Skrulls who are fleeing the threat of Galactus. They must defeat Galactus before he continues on to devour Earth.

If done well, it covers all the bases as far as things we have never seen before, fantastical exploration and moments of awe. It also (imo) incorporates every decent villain Fox has access to.

 

[Drakepool]

I'm for Victor Von Doom appearing, just not as the main villain. Maybe the movie can end with him getting the iconic armor. The main villain can be someone else.

 

[SlamAdams]

Inhumans

 

[The Villain]

The Wizard as a main villain first then maybe onto Doom for 2nd.

Also classic contenders worthy of a movie Annihilus, Puppet Master, Diablo & Psycho Man.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

I'm going with Mole Man.

 

[metaphysician]

The Wizard as a main villain first then maybe onto Doom for 2nd.

The problem with the Wizard is, I don't really see any way to make him both compelling and distinct in a first movie. He's a second rate super genius compared with Doom, and the only distinct feature of his is "forming a Fightful Four." You could do that in a latter movie, but not the first one.

Honestly, if I had my druthers, I'd go:

1. Origin movie, with Skrulls as the villains

2. Dr Doom

3. Galactus

You'd be better off using Annihilus or Mole Man before touching the Frightful Four.

 

[TheHeatKitchen]

The problem with the Wizard is, I don't really see any way to make him both compelling and distinct in a first movie. He's a second rate super genius compared with Doom, and the only distinct feature of his is "forming a Fightful Four." You could do that in a latter movie, but not the first one.

Honestly, if I had my druthers, I'd go:

1. Origin movie, with Skrulls as the villains

2. Dr Doom

3. Galactus

You'd be better off using Annihilus or Mole Man before touching the Frightful Four.

My problem with your plan is it's too similar to how the Avengers trilogy could go. Small team of heroes fights an alien invasion, possibly an earthly, immensely powerful threat (Ultron), then a final intergalactic force (Thanos).

not that it WILL turn out that way, but still ...

 

[metaphysician]

I see no problem with being similar to Avengers, honestly. Between the completely different character dynamic and the different themes, centered on exploring the unknown? People might notice the broad similarities, but they wouldn't care. Not unless the movies have other flaws that would prove terminal anyway.

 

[Spider-Fan83]

lol

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I'd like to see a trilogy with Annihilus as the primary villain in the first film (with some Doom) that sets up a 2nd film with Doom as the primary villain (with some Silver Surfer) that sets up a 3rd film ultimate show-down with Galactus.

Something like that could be really intense. The only concern I have with something like that is - where could you go from there? But if they lock up the key actors, director etc. for a 3 film set, they could go all out on something like that and then just start fresh after that - sort of like the Christopher Nolan Batman.

Unfortunately, I still have serious doubts they could really pull that off right, and it might be better to think smaller rather than completely screwing the property by over-reaching and just burning everything out.

 

[metaphysician]

Annihilus could serve as a substitute for the Skrulls in my framework, if you tie their origin into the Negative Zone rather than space travel.

I know, I know, dozens of people right now are complaining about the idea of "yet another origin." However, my idea is that, if you make the origin itself an entire adventure rather than having it tie into some kind of 'ordinary life beforehand', you'd end up with something distinct. So, they do the experimental space flight, get powers. . . and then land on the giant alien spacecraft carrying the Skrull invasion force to Earth, and have to stop it. Or they do the N-zone portal experiment, pop through, gain powers. . . and then discover the natives, and their own malevolent schemes and have to stop them.

Basically, instead of "ordinary life, origin event, ordinary life changes", you have "ordinary life, origin event, adventure."

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Annihilus could serve as a substitute for the Skrulls in my framework, if you tie their origin into the Negative Zone rather than space travel.

I know, I know, dozens of people right now are complaining about the idea of "yet another origin." However, my idea is that, if you make the origin itself an entire adventure rather than having it tie into some kind of 'ordinary life beforehand', you'd end up with something distinct. So, they do the experimental space flight, get powers. . . and then land on the giant alien spacecraft carrying the Skrull invasion force to Earth, and have to stop it. Or they do the N-zone portal experiment, pop through, gain powers. . . and then discover the natives, and their own malevolent schemes and have to stop them.

Basically, instead of "ordinary life, origin event, ordinary life changes", you have "ordinary life, origin event, adventure."

One interesting factor about the Fantastic Four is that even prior to the changes they arent all that ordinary. Unlike Peter Parker the high school student or Captain America the kid from Brooklyn. They are essentially field research scientists. modern day adventurers with or without powers. so instead of "ordinary life, origin event, adventure." its more like "adventure, origin event, superpowered adventure. That guideline should help serve to keep their origin more fresh and entertaining.

and in that regard, the three acts practically write themselves. Research Scientists travel to alternate dimension, their cellular structure is radically altered, with their new abilities they are able to overcome their obstacles and return home.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

I think they should build to Dr. Doom slowly, sort of like what The Iron Man films have done with The Mandarin...

As far as the first villain goes, why not Mole Man? All FOX really need do is use FF #1 as an outline for a movie script. It's a great story, and teaches a moral lesson about judging someone by their looks.

So yeah; my vote goes to Mole Man.

 

[metaphysician]

One interesting factor about the Fantastic Four is that even prior to the changes they arent all that ordinary. Unlike Peter Parker the high school student or Captain America the kid from Brooklyn. They are essentially field research scientists. modern day adventurers with or without powers. so instead of "ordinary life, origin event, adventure." its more like "adventure, origin event, superpowered adventure. That guideline should help serve to keep their origin more fresh and entertaining.

and in that regard, the three acts practically write themselves. Research Scientists travel to alternate dimension, their cellular structure is radically altered, with their new abilities they are able to overcome their obstacles and return home.

That's pretty much what I had in mind, yes. Maybe have a newspaper headline towards the end "Dimensional exploration team, thought dead, return with fantastic powers."

 

[metaphysician]

I think they should build to Dr. Doom slowly, sort of like what The Iron Man films have done with The Mandarin...

As far as the first villain goes, why not Mole Man? All FOX really need do is use FF #1 as an outline for a movie script. It's a great story, and teaches a moral lesson about judging someone by their looks.

So yeah; my vote goes to Mole Man.

The problem with Mole Man is that it would take *epic* skills to sell him to the general audience as someone to take seriously. "Cast Peter Dinklage" would be a good *starting* point.

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

The problem with Mole Man is that it would take *epic* skills to sell him to the general audience as someone to take seriously. "Cast Peter Dinklage" would be a good *starting* point.

If I were doing Mole-man, the audience wouldn't see him until the final 15 minutes.

They wouldn't be battling Mole-man - they'd be battling an infestation of creatures and spending most of the film trying to figure out what the heck was going on.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

The problem with Mole Man is that it would take *epic* skills to sell him to the general audience as someone to take seriously. "Cast Peter Dinklage" would be a good *starting* point.

Mole Man is short, but he's not a midget. I like Dinklage, but he doesn't fit Mole Man. I mean, no offense, but you're trying to have the audience take him seriously as a villain... going to be hard to do with a midget imo.

Also, it's not hard to have Mole Man as a sympathetic villain who is taken seriously. But, we'll see.

On a separate note, I'm imagining a "Journey to the Center of the Earth" vibe from this movie if Subterranea is involved.

 

[The Overlord]

I think they should build to Dr. Doom slowly, sort of like what The Iron Man films have done with The Mandarin...

As far as the first villain goes, why not Mole Man? All FOX really need do is use FF #1 as an outline for a movie script. It's a great story, and teaches a moral lesson about judging someone by their looks.

So yeah; my vote goes to Mole Man.

The problem is Mole Man is not a very compelling a villain, period. He is an almost blind, short fat little man with a stick who complains about he can't get laid. That is not a very scary or sympathetic villain. His back story is very rushed and underdeveloped, so it is not very compelling. Dr. Doom for example, has a very well developed and interesting back story, which is one of the reasons that Dr. Doom is a way better villain then Mole Man is. Very few FF villains besides Doom, have gotten any sort development or focus after their first appearance. Red Ghost remains a one dimensional communist stereotype villain, even though the Berlin wall fell more then 20 years ago. The FF's rogues gallery needed a revamp for the longest time, but the writers have only made baby steps in that direction. It says something when Mad Thinker and Annihilus' best stories were in other books rather then the FF titles.

Really Ultimate Mole Man is a better developed villain then 616 Mole Man, with a more developed back story, that makes better use of him as a scientist, with more of an interesting relationship with the FF. I think I would prefer Ultimate Mole Man appear on the Silver screen, rather then the 616 Mole Man.

If I were doing Mole-man, the audience wouldn't see him until the final 15 minutes.

They wouldn't be battling Mole-man - they'd be battling an infestation of creatures and spending most of the film trying to figure out what the heck was going on.

I don't having a villain who only appears for the last 15 minutes is an effective or memorable villain, it didn't work for Venom in Spider-Man 3, its hard to make Mole Man compelling if he only shows up in the last 15 minutes.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

I officially voted Annihilus. Assuming Doom is introduced as well.

He should look something like this:

And be tied in with a classic negative zone:

 

[Willie Lumpkin]

I don't having a villain who only appears for the last 15 minutes is an effective or memorable villain, it didn't work for Venom in Spider-Man 3, its hard to make Mole Man compelling if he only shows up in the last 15 minutes.

That's a very different situation because Venom didn't exist until the end of Spider-Man 3.

In the case of Mole-man, he would be there, pulling the strings, but the FF and the audience wouldn't know much about him.

The unknown is much more frightening than the known. Once a villain becomes known and humanized he/she becomes less of a visceral threat. In the case of Mole-man, we don't have to see him. His monsters can create a very real and unambiguous threat and provide enough tension and drama...

... if done right.

Think about how much screen time the shark in Jaws had. We didn't need to see the shark to recognize the danger. The truth in Psycho wasn't revealed until the end, but that didn't mean there wasn't a feeling af danger.

And in two of the three Christopher Nolan Batman films, the true identity of the villains weren't revealed until the end.

 

[fantastic fifth]

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

That's a very different situation because Venom didn't exist until the end of Spider-Man 3.

In the case of Mole-man, he would be there, pulling the strings, but the FF and the audience wouldn't know much about him.

The unknown is much more frightening than the known. Once a villain becomes known and humanized he/she becomes less of a visceral threat. In the case of Mole-man, we don't have to see him. His monsters can create a very real and unambiguous threat and provide enough tension and drama...

... if done right.

Think about how much screen time the shark in Jaws had. We didn't need to see the shark to recognize the danger. The truth in Psycho wasn't revealed until the end, but that didn't mean there wasn't a feeling af danger.

And in two of the three Christopher Nolan Batman films, the true identity of the villains weren't revealed until the end.

Mole Man needs to appear for more than just at the last 15 minutes. He needs to be developed throughout the movie so we know why he's doing what he does and who he is as a person so we can connect with him. Also, regardless of the true identity of the villains being revealed until the end, they were still in the movie(not last 15 mins) and got room to be developed and be known to the audience. The shark in JAWS is not a person and therefore didn't really need to be explored or developed... there's not really much depth to a bloodthirsty shark.

Mole Man is the type of villain that needs to be humanized because he's a human who feels very real and understandable emotions of anger and loneliness for being treated as an outcast and freak. He's the type of villain that the audience can relate to. Someone like Annihilus, however, is not.