Re: Ultimate Spider-Man Vol. 2 (Discussion/Spoilers)
Did you read the annual where Mysterio showed up for the first time?
I always see you rip into villains taking out old villains. Sometimes you are right but sometimes you are wrong. This was a good way. Why wouldn't you take out your rivals or the man that can not be touched. It would improve your cred for sure.
I see you rip into all the different ways people try to introduce villains but I never see any ideas how to do it "the right way".
Firstly - I may have read the annual, I may not have. I can't remember. And since this is #001, I shouldn't have to have read anything prior to it to 'get it'.
As for the right/wrong way - My problem isn't so much that Mysterio killed Kingpin, but rather that it was just needless and gratuitous. I don't mean from Mysterio's point of view - from his, it's totally fine. From Bendis', it's shoddy.
And you're probably right - I bash more than I... I dunno what the word is.
Anyhow, the "right" way to introduce a villain...
The problem with having a new villain kill and old villain is that it's done to show how badass the new villain is. See, the new villain generates no heat or excitement or menace. Instead, it
cannibalizes the previous villain, stealing
their menace. The writer removes a toy from the toybox and replaces it with one of their own making. The original villain however, did not do this. The original villain worked on its own. The only reason the new villain does this is because it's easier.
The right way to introduce a villain would be...
Bane: Bane breaks all of the inmates of Arkham Asylum, forcing Batman to capture
all his villains simultaneously. When he does so, Batman returns to the cave at his weakest condition - and Bane is in the cave waiting for him. He then cripples him. Yes, it's true that Bane did break Killer Croc and used Batman's gallery to get Batman, but here's the thing: the Killer Croc thing is rubbish. And he didn't have to step on top of the other villains - in fact, he
used the villains carefully to his own ends to create menace.
The Black Glove: The Black Glove in Morrison's BATMAN: RIP actually worked very similarly to Bane - using Batman's well-established history as pawns in a game to destroy Batman. The Black Glove went further by creating a new demonic Batman-villain of fire and created menace for him by setting him up with dreams and prophecies and two previous Batmen, and of course, he was a set up for the Black Glove.
(Quickly - if I'm babbling it's because I'm really tired. But this is a good point you made so I'm trying to be coherent.)
The Joker: (man, these are all Batman references) in THE DARK KNIGHT he creates menace with the bank heist, and then the pencil trick. Yes, a villain entering and killing a character is
fine, the problem is when they kill a pre-existing villain purely for the sake of setting up menace. Imagine if TDK opened with Joker pulling the pencil trick on the Scarecrow. No no no.
Venom: (yay, no Batman) Lots of foreshadowing and when he appeared he attacked Spidey in a way no other villai had.
For Mysterio, the 'right way' (as if there's only one and I know it!) could've been probably more menacing if you had a bunch of mafia guys sitting in a room and Mysterio has called the meeting to take over the gangs and he's just an illusion and then boom and everyone dies.
Or something. I'm really knackered. Tell you what, if I made no sense or was rubbish, let me know and I'll try again properly. I know what I'm trying to say, but I'm finding it hard to articulate. And I'm sure I can come up with "5 ways to introduce Ultimate Mysterio" than killing the Kingpin when I'm not this tired.
