Spider-Man: Far From Home (July 2, 2019) [ENDGAME SPOILERS ALLOWED!] (1 Viewer)

[dpippel]

Looks like Jake Gyllenhaal is being tapped to play the villain Mysterio in the sequel:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/h...al-talks-star-spider-man-homecoming-2-1113627

 

[Sam Favate]

It also looks like Michael Keaton will return as the Vulture.

https://mcuexchange.com/michael-keaton-returning-as-the-vulture-for-spider-man-sequel/

Can anyone say "Sinister Six"?

 

[dpippel]

If they're really planning on going into the Sinister Six, I'm VERY curious about who they might cast as Doc Ock.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I hope they're not doing the Sinister Six right now. I mean, haven't they learned their lesson about cramming too many villains into one Spider-Man movie?

Spider-Man 3. The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Just saying.

 

[Malcolm R]

I hope they're not doing the Sinister Six right now. I mean, haven't they learned their lesson about cramming too many villains into one Spider-Man movie?

Spider-Man 3. The Amazing Spider-Man 2.

Just saying.

You think Hollywood ever "learns" anything from past failures?

 

[Jake Lipson]

Considering that ASM2 was so bad that it singlehandedly caused Sony to share custody with Marvel, I would hope they take a lesson from that, yeah..

For now, I will assume that Kevin Feige and Marvel know what they are doing. But increasing the number of villains in the sequel is almost never a good idea.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Considering that ASM2 was so bad that it singlehandedly caused Sony to share custody with Marvel, I would hope they take a lesson from that, yeah..

For now, I will assume that Kevin Feige and Marvel know what they are doing. But increasing the number of villains in the sequel is almost never a good idea.

I wouldn’t worry about it. Toomes has a personal connection with Peter and he knows his identity. Would actually be kind of odd if they just dropped that thread in the next movie. While he may have a role as an active villain, he may also just have a presence in the movie from prison.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Oh, yeah, if it's just those two, that should be fine. It just feels like bringing in the entire Sinister Six at this point would be a bit overcrowded.

 

[Sean Bryan]

Oh, yeah, if it's just those two, that should be fine. It just feels like bringing in the entire Sinister Six at this point would be a bit overcrowded.

Absolutely.

My hope is that if they do the Sinister Six they take their time and do it naturally. Maybe after 5 movies (with new villains in each) they can bring back those characters for a team-up effort against Spider-Man. But yeah, don't do what they tried with the "Amazing" series and rush to try to force it in by the third movie and cram a bunch of stuff in the second in order to set that up. But I don't think there is any reason to worry about that here since they aren't announcing two NEW villains, just a new villain and the potential to continue a story thread from the first movie, which already is the more "organic" route.

Their may still be more "villain characters" in the sequel though. Keep in mind, Homecoming itself had multiple villains: Vulture, Shocker (two versions), the Tinkerer, and Gargan (Scorpian). The key was how they were used. Aside from Vulture they were all minor supporting characters to various degrees that fit naturally into the story they were telling. I wouldn't be surprised to see Gargan also back in the sequel because he has a grudge against Spider-Man and would fit naturally into whatever they are doing with Toomes, assuming they explore their relationship in prison.

 

[Jake Lipson]

On the other hand, Keaton being in prison would also have been an adequate way to write him out if he didn't want to come back, since we wouldn't necessarily have needed to see the prison to know he's there. But he was really god as that character, so his return is most welcome.

I wonder if they'll bring back Laura Harrier as Liz. Even though she's moving because he "doesn't want us there for the trial," I hope they find a reason anyway. I always felt that Liz was not given enough agency in the first film, and that Peter ought to have owned up to his role in bringing down her dad and told her what was going on. It's weird that one of the main themes of the series is responsibility, but Peter doesn't really have to take responsibility for much of what he does in the first one.

 

[Bryan^H]

Mysterio has always been one of my favorite Spiderman villains. The way he messes with Spidey's head makes him more a psychological threat, and I can see a unique, different type of Spiderman film with him in mind.

However I was really hoping for the Scorpion as the next villain. He is truly scary, and one of the very few enemies that Peter Parker was terrified of(at least in the comic book).

 

[TonyD]

Woah...Mysterio is my favorite villain of all and I really hope they do,it right.

Electro is my second favorite SM villain and Sony really destroyed that character.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I hope they keep Keaton as a morally ambiguous and tenuous ally to Peter. One of my favorite parts about the ending to Homecoming was that Toomes ultimately recognized that Peter did right by him and his family, and respected him for it.

 

[Jake Lipson]

One of my favorite parts about the ending to Homecoming was that Toomes ultimately recognized that Peter did right by him and his family, and respected him for it.

Agreed completely. If he turns into an antagonist for Peter again, that's going to seriously undermine the value of where he ended in Homecoming. It would be far more interesting to examine his relationships with other villains who have it out for Spider-Man while he is working behind-the-scenes to keep them off of Peter's trail, because that obviously creates the most dramatic conflict.

 

[TonyD]

Are you guys kidding?

Toomes only did that so he could keep that very valuable info for himself to use when it suits him.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Toomes only did that so he could keep that very valuable info for himself to use when it suits him.

That's one way of looking at it. But I stand by what I said above as my opinion. Like I said, making him a covert ally for Peter provides more conflict than if he's just another guy with a revenge scheme.

 

[TonyD]

He’s a villain. The Vulture. Not gonna be a covert ally or any kind of ally.

 

[Jake Lipson]

He’s a villain.

I think Keaton's portrayal of him was more nuanced than that, but I see your point.

 

[TonyD]

I don’t disagree about his portrayal. But he’s a bad guy and is going to do bad guy things.
Even if he keeps Peter’s secret it will only be for his personal gain.

No different then any other Soider-man villain.

Even Doc Ock in 2 while actually good at heart did bad things for his own gain.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Even if he keeps Peter’s secret it will only be for his personal gain.

How exactly does he gain anything from keeping Peter's secret? Your theory is that he wants to go after Peter himself when he gets out of jail? I really, really hope that's not the case. They could do that, but I think it's much more interesting if they don't.

We'll see how it plays out in the next movie. I still think he was protecting Peter as a result of Peter having saved his life, and because it's the right thing to do. It is possible for the character to make progress toward being a better person. To use your example of Doc Ock, he did this, too, by sacrificing himself at the end of Spider-Man 2.

Plus, there are just more story possibilities from Toomes trying to be good than if they just go with the "revenge" angle. "He was a bad guy in the last one, but what if he isn't now?" is a really compelling question for the movie to ask. That doesn't mean he has to be good all the time, like a recovering addict who has trouble kicking the habit -- he could very easily relapse into his old ways -- but trying to turn over a new leaf and help Peter would differentiate his story from others we have seen before and would give Keaton something really meaty and interesting to play, which is why I really hope they go this route.

Also, I think the complexity of his arc will also depend on how much screen time they devote to him. If it's a couple minutes cameo from prison, obviously he'll have less to do than if he is an integral part of the plot again. That likely depends on both how much Keaton wants to do and how much Sony is willing to pay him to return. (Presumably, he'd get less money for a cameo than for another extended appearance.)

I'm VERY curious about who they might cast as Doc Ock.

Here, of course, they run into the issue of Doc Ock having been done tremendously well before by Sam Raimi and Alfred Molina. I was hoping for Spider-Man 2 to get a Best Picture nomination in 2004-5, and would have nominated Molina too in a heartbeat. So far, Marvel's choices with regard to the MCU version of the character (including the apparent choice of Mysterio as the main villain for the next one) seem to be deliberately intended to do things that Sony DIDN'T do on their own, so if they do bring back Doc Ock, I suspect it will be a very different take. But Molina was the best villain in that whole trilogy, I think, and casts a long shadow.

Also, nobody has actually said this yet because we've all been talking about the selection of the character and the possibility of the Sinister Six. But it should be said: Jake Gyllenhaal is great casting for this. Good on Sony and Marvel for landing him. I can't wait to see what he'll do.