Whether it's discarded plots or scenes, a version of an idea that didn't make it into the script, or appearances/designs that were ultimately rejected, what deleted ideas from the Spider-Man films would you have liked to see?
The Delmar's logo, which we'd already seen in leaked photos on Peter's t-shirt, also seems to confirm the Daily Bugle's appearance in the film. There are still people who believe in Mysterio.
But above all, the "Toomes Salvage" logo suggests our prayers might be answered, and they're reviving the discarded idea from No Way Home, only now Toomes is running a salvage company..
MORBIUS IS NOT CANON, GENTLEMEN!!
P.S.: As always with LEGO, be very cautious, although let's remember that, for now, they're the only company that has shown Tombstone and the correct design for Scorpion's tail.
- The Death of Frank's Family (MCU)
The origin of Punisher is quite simple: one day, Frank went out with his wife and children for a family outing in Central Park when suddenly a shooting broke out, and his family died in the crossfire.
But Netflix/MCU decided to add "complexity," turning what should have been a simple shooting into a super elaborate conspiracy involving three entire crime families (now four), the armed forces, Frank's squad, heroin trafficking, a leaked torture video, Micro, the mayor's office, the entire justice system, Frank's best friend, and all so that they couldn't even achieve their objective, which was... to kill him.
- The Spider (Amazing Spider-Man Saga)
A classic, what should have been a simple twist of fate ended up becoming a conspiracy orchestrated by Oscorp and Peter's father. They created a spider meant to cure Norman, but also to give him powers, so it only worked with Parker blood (screw the idea of "anyone can be Spider-Man"). This also involved the Russians, the Sinister Six, and a plan to... dominate the world.
And the deleted scenes exaggerated this even further with Oscorp spying on Peter since his childhood and Richard Parker's incoherent survival.
On the one hand, given the tone the film seems to be aiming for—a more epic one, similar to Raimi's films—I find it hard to believe we'll see nothing but low-level villains/jokes. But I can also understand the thinking, "It would be a waste to introduce the Marvel Studios Kraven in a montage," and it occurred to me, what if, both in the montage and during the film, we see villains/concepts we didn't see in the Home saga?
For example:
- Shocker in his full suit (Homecoming)
- The real Hydro-Man and Molten-Man (FFH)
- MCU versions with the discarded designs of Sandman and Lizard (NWH)
On the one hand, these are characters that have already been adapted, and let's be realistic, they're no longer viable as main characters in a film. But these villains aren't exactly unserious either, and they did leave a bittersweet taste in the mouth because... either they weren't real, or they didn't have their costumes, their designs were limited because the design of the other universe had to be respected, or because of the pandemic, the actors weren't even on set for a single day.
The concept art already exists; some even had early-stage CGI models, and actors like Shocker's have already hinted that they might return.
So, compensating by showing them in the initial cut would serve as a good fan service that few would expect and would even make sense within the story.
Because on one hand, it would justify why Damage Control is allied with Spider-Man and why they seem to be in a better position than they were with Wonder Man. Spider-Man is capturing villains who really need a special prison, solving Damage Control's budget cuts problem.
And it could also justify the danger posed by the body-possessing/telepathic villain and The Hand, who is attacking Damage Control facilities and freeing villains. It's not just because the girl endangers innocent people with her actions.
The Damage Control chief could pose the question to Spider-Man: "What will happen if The Hand finds where we're holding Mark Raxton? What if they release Schultz and he allies himself with them, just like Gargan did? What if, with her mental powers, that girl manages to unleash the beast inside Dr. Connors? Or even worse, what if she possesses Morris Bench's body?"
This would be a good way to present the true danger the villains represent and why it's one of "the greatest threats Spider-Man will face," because if The Hand or the girl manage to gain access to one of the heavy hitters, New York could burn to ashes.
On the one hand, given the tone the film seems to be aiming for—a more epic one, similar to Raimi's films—I find it hard to believe we'll see nothing but low-level villains/jokes. But I can also understand the thinking, "It would be a waste to introduce the Marvel Studios Kraven in a montage," and it occurred to me, what if, both in the montage and during the film, we see villains/concepts we didn't see in the Home saga?
For example:
- Shocker in his full suit (Homecoming)
- The real Hydro-Man and Molten-Man (FFH)
- MCU versions with the discarded designs of Sandman and Lizard (NWH)
On the one hand, these are characters that have already been adapted, and let's be realistic, they're no longer viable as main characters in a film. But these villains aren't exactly unserious either, and they did leave a bittersweet taste in the mouth because... either they weren't real, or they didn't have their costumes, their designs were limited because the design of the other universe had to be respected, or because of the pandemic, the actors weren't even on set for a single day.
The concept art already exists; some even had early-stage CGI models, and actors like Shocker's have already hinted that they might return.
So, compensating by showing them in the initial cut would serve as a good fan service that few would expect and would even make sense within the story.
Because on one hand, it would justify why Damage Control is allied with Spider-Man and why they seem to be in a better position than they were with Wonder Man. Spider-Man is capturing villains who really need a special prison, solving Damage Control's budget cuts problem.
And it could also justify the danger posed by the body-possessing/telepathic villain and The Hand, who is attacking Damage Control facilities and freeing villains. It's not just because the girl endangers innocent people with her actions.
The Damage Control chief could pose the question to Spider-Man: "What will happen if The Hand finds where we're holding Mark Raxton? What if they release Schultz and he allies himself with them, just like Gargan did? What if, with her mental powers, that girl manages to unleash the beast inside Dr. Connors? Or even worse, what if she possesses Morris Bench's body?"
This would be a good way to present the true danger the villains represent and why it's one of "the greatest threats Spider-Man will face," because if The Hand or the girl manage to gain access to one of the heavy hitters, New York could burn to ashes.
Margot Robbie saying she'll never be as pretty as a stereotypical Barbie... not even the screenwriters believed that (Barbie).
"He's just a kid, no bigger than my son." Even in the movie itself, Tobey doesn't look or act like a kid (Spider-Man 2).
Seeing how lately there's been a reevaluation of classic costumes instead of making them "realistic," I started thinking about one of the most criticized for this: Electro.
Is his design really unadaptable? For a long time, it's been said that it is, but aside from the star, which has already been solved by making it out of electricity, as in No Way Home, I don't really see that many problems with his suit.
And there have already been games and fan art that have shown him with a look more faithful to the comics without looking ridiculous. And looking at some concept art of his appearance in No Way Home (which I love, but I really do see little to no inspiration from his classic suit), the big problem is that they were trying to make it look totally "realistic." The same thing happened in TASM2, and I think that's perhaps where the problem lies.
Perhaps the problem is wanting to view it from the perspective of "it's a silly design, it needs to be improved to look more believable" instead of "it's a silly design, but it fits the image of an egocentric villain who would wear a suit to be recognized, combined with some elements of an electrician, which was his profession."
The fan art design belongs to the artist AnGREY_21 on Twitter, and the other two are from the Ultimate Alliance games.
https://x.com/AnGREY_21/status/2002996237549871537
Well, I really liked Ma Gnucci's approach in the special, the fact that she's, in a way, a reflection of Frank and the consequences of his crusade.
Even though they were criminals, it's the Punisher's actions that unleash hell and Ma Gnucci's wrath. She had to watch her entire family die without being able to do anything, and now that she has nothing left to lose, she decides to turn all that hatred against Frank and punish him.
Also, the fact that he appears weak but has the power over criminals to compensate for it seems like a fresh twist for this Punisher, who has generally faced soldiers and trained individuals.
The only things I don't like are:
Linking the Gnucci massacre to the death of his family. I think at this point it would have been better to simply say they were a random criminal family who, by sheer bad luck, fell into Frank's path.
The fact that we may never see this storyline resolved, because I doubt we'll see Ma Gnucci in Brand New Day, and unless they announce a Punisher series soon, I have a feeling this whole Gnucci revenge thing will be forgotten.
I've seen several people claiming it's very likely, if not almost certain, that we'll see the Jackal in Brand New Day; some are even going so far as to say he could be the main villain.
But so far, we only have the name of a beer as a reference to him, and nothing more. Not only that, but would it really be feasible for them to use him? Considering he's possibly one of the most controversial characters and that his major contributions haven't been well-received.
Let's look at the three cases. What's the most characteristic thing about the Jackal?
- His relationship with Gwen Stacy. This would OBVIOUSLY never be adapted because it could be considered p3d0philia, and it's been one of the most criticized aspects of the character. To the point that for many, the twist they gave him in the 2017 series, making them related, was very disturbing. So it's practically impossible for them to adapt this, even if it's not with Gwen.
- The Clone Saga, possibly his most well-known arc, but also one of the most hated by the Spider-Man community, and for good reason, as it marked the turning point of one of the most questionable periods in the character's history, with a clumsy attempt to "reinvent" Spider-Man in the 90s. And yes, one could say it's an arc that could be fixed, but is it worth it? Especially since Marvel Studios already has problems maintaining Spider-Man; now imagine having to deal with two more.
- Spider-Island, his second most well-known arc, although this time he only plays a significant role by creating the toxin that gives New York City Peter's powers. And yes, many people have mentioned the obvious references to the event in the Brand New Day promotion and trailer, so we could even say it's an arc they could draw inspiration from. What's the problem?
Even if they are adapting this arc, it seems they are leaning more towards the mystical side with The Hand than the scientific side, where Warren fits better. Furthermore, nothing at the moment seems to indicate that we will see the Man-Spider epidemic from the comics.
I don't know, I honestly don't see how he would fit into the story beyond the theory that he created "Green Jackal" beer, which, by the way... would be rather absurd to use his nickname as the brand name. Nor would he fit into the future of the MCU because, again... everything involving him has been heavily criticized at the publisher.
Even when the Jackal isn't Miles Warren, people have hated him as the Clone Conspiracy, which for many was the arc that ruined Ben Reilly.
Tony creates the Arc Reactor (Iron Man 1)
During the film, we are told that although the arc reactor already existed, it was gigantic and cumbersome, and that the very idea of reducing it to a more accessible size was impossible with current technology... "TONY STARK BUILT THIS IN A CAVE!! WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!!!"
The Super Saiyan in Universe 6 (Dragon Ball Super)
Although this is a problem that was already present in the Trunks and Goten era, it was in Universe 6 where it became most blatant. To achieve Super Saiyan, not only is physical training needed, but also a strong emotional charge to "ignite the spark." Even in the Champa tournament, Vegeta had to trick Cabba into awakening Super Saiyan by saying he would destroy his planet and everyone he loves.
But when it came time to teach Caulifla and Kale Super Saiyan, they changed it to simply an itch at the base of the spine and rather basic insults to awaken it.
Obadiah refers to it as a "publicity stunt" and says that "it wasn't profitable from the day we built it," concluding that the ARC technology is pointless.
Why?
The only major drawback mentioned in the film is that they can't make it smaller, but despite that, it remains an engine capable of generating clean, waste-free energy almost without limit, with a power output that, according to Tony, is capable of powering an entire factory.
Even if it can't be portable, I'm sure it could have uses, even in the military sphere.
It easily ranks second only to the Brand New Day suit.
But I see this as a logical evolution of the Homecoming suit, fixing many of that suit's problems. For starters, the "unnecessary lines" are much better distributed.
The lines in the blue are more subtle, and the black lines are now only on the blue outline without interfering with the red. Also, the spider, being larger and with longer legs, actually looks like a spider and not a tick.
I'd say the only drawback is that, in my personal opinion, the web-shooters look better underneath, but other than that, it's one of the best.
And look, it could serve as an alternate version if Holland hadn't met Tobey and Andrew and only had his own suit as inspiration.
I mean, it's obvious the reason is purely contractual and that the series is about Daredevil, but if the explanation they're going to suggest is "he was busy fighting enemies," then I'd at least expect them to be serious enemies.
Initially, I remember rumors that the time jump would show Peter only fighting B-list villains and joke villains, implying that Spider-Man hasn't faced any serious villains in all this time, but honestly, at this point, I find that hard to believe.
Because even if the movie is aimed at a casual audience, if the idea is to sell the idea that Spider-Man is currently the most beloved hero in New York, so much so that he earned the key to the city, then at least give me a coherent reason to believe that, that he has genuinely protected the city from important criminals (like the Insomniac guy who defeated his entire classic rogues' gallery, and people know it), and not that he earned that title by kicking 8-Ball's butt dozens of times.
And for those who follow the MCU it would be worse, because we already saw a pretty important event like Fisk's reign and they say that the important reason why Spider-Man wasn't there is because he had to face Boomerang and White Rabbit.
A series of six short films that chronicle the adventures of Scott Lang in his civilian life and as Ant-Man. His adventures range from helping Cassie at a science fair to retrieving a time-altering invention of Hank's.
All of this is accompanied by Hank, Hope, Cassie, and their trusty allies, the ants.
First, take all of this as a somewhat far-fetched theory (although, well, with this movie, it wouldn't be anything new), but it might make some sense given what's been presented so far.
Since the release of No Way Home, there's been a debate about whether, as with the X-Men, we'll see MCU versions of the villains from the Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield sagas in the future, or if these are the definitive versions and we won't see any others.
However, at least for me, I think there might be some clues that we could see these villains again. What prompted me to write this post is the script's mention of "Peter's Fabricator," who patches his suit in that scene.
It mentions the fabricator as a name we've heard before, and it's true; this was also the name Peter gave to Stark's machine in No Way Home. Now, would Peter really need a "3D printer on steroids" just to repair his suit?
This bothers me because the script also mentions that the new suit has seams, like it's handmade (odd if they're supposed to make it in the Far From Home style). And well, what else would Peter have used the fabricator for? For the villains' cures.
Furthermore, according to the script, the movie starts just 9 months after No Way Home, and then we'd have a montage showing what Peter did in those 4 YEARS!!! where apparently, Peter will wear the No Way Home suit for a while, although there's a possibility it's just for merchandising. The fact that it has battle damage, which looks like scratches and marks, seems to indicate that this suit could appear in the film and be destroyed, and the BND suit will come from it. But when, if so far everything we see in the montage is with the new suit?
That would mean we'd see more confrontations in the montage, and let's remember that according to rumors, We would see many more villains than those already introduced, and if we have a four-year montage, it makes sense that we'd have quick cameos from multiple enemies beyond Boomerang and Tarantula.
And if we're close to the No Way Home era, Peter built his own version of the Fabricator with which he made the cures, and possibly... At least to me, it would make sense that in the montage we see at least one of the villains from No Way Home that Peter tried to cure as a cameo. For example, given the damage to the suit, perhaps Lizard will appear as a cameo and be the one who damages the suit, like in TASM 1.
Although, actors like the one from Sandman have mentioned for years that he's strongly interested in returning, talking with Feige and Pascal about it. So, quick cameos from Sandman, Lizard, and even Electro do seem possible (after all, they're characters who don't need a deep introduction like in Insomniac).
On the other hand, the CinemaCon trailer mentions... Part of the reason Ned and Mj threw a party is because she went to a job interview with an unnamed company, but he turned her down for being a "soulless corporation." I seriously doubt it's an existing organization because then there would be no need to hide it and avoid mentioning a Roxxon, OXE, or AIM. And since we're talking about a Spider-Man movie, I think it's possible we'll have a subtle reference to Oscorp and, therefore, to Norman.
It's been rumored for quite some time that Marvel is interested in introducing its own Norman Osborn in the future, so planting the seeds now would make sense.
Obviously, all of this is highly speculative and possibly wrong, but I'll leave the possibility out there. I highly doubt, for example, that the cast will be full of B-list villains. And there has been interest from some actors in returning.
I'm rewatching Wakanda Forever and remembered that after its release, many wondered if there was a possibility of a solo Namor project (since he also has his own stories and villains in the comics).
But it was mentioned that it was complicated because his rights belonged to Universal, just like Hulk's.
Was this true in the end?
Does Marvel have to treat him like Hulk and not allow him a solo movie?
...Does Universal even still own the rights to Hulk and Namor?
Regardless of whether it turns out to be a good or bad movie, I think it's going to divide the fandom...
Because (more for worse than for better) many have already formed an idea of what this movie should be.
Some expect it to be almost a carbon copy of the Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield version, an adaptation of Man-Spider from the animated series, or a VERY long trailer for the X-Men in the MCU.
And if the movie doesn't meet those expectations, it's already bad.
This is already evident with the revelation of the first pages of the script, revealing Peter Parker's AI and his own version of Stark's 3D printer.
And what was people's reaction? Opinions are divided, with some people losing interest simply because they hear we'll still have technology (even though it was stated from the beginning that Peter would still have technology in interviews with the screenwriters during No Way Home).
Added to this are the divided opinions about whether Ned and Michelle will still be present, or the rumors now leaning more towards Man-Spider not being in the film after all.
And if this is already the case with these small details, what will happen with bigger details? Let's remember this well.
NO ONE has confirmed who Sadie Sink's character will be. What if she isn't Jean Grey after all? What if she is indeed the main villain, as the trailers have indicated?
And what if they do adapt the whole spider-totem thing to join Doomsday?
I really feel this movie is going to cause a lot of controversy and divided opinions because many people already have very strong ideas about certain things, even if they didn't really make sense from the beginning... I don't know, what do you all think?