Norman Osborn as a General MU villain. What do you think?

[classicgmer]

I think Spider-Man's reasons for hating Osborn go a lot deeper than just not liking how Norman operates, given how much personal pain and misery Norman has inflicted on him over the years. That said, I'd think Iron Man would hate Osborn for the same reason he might have hated Stane and Hammer --- those guys are basically unreformed, unrepentant versions of the man he used to be, and Osborn is all that plus an unhinged murdering psychopath. If we got other heroes involved, I could see Daredevil hating him because Osborn frequently uses his money to twist the law so he never has to pay for the harm he's inflicted on others, which would deeply infuriate him as someone dedicated to the law even if he has to break it himself as a vigilante. Songbird would also have more personal reasons for hating Osborn, as the Thunderbolts were her chance to redeem herself and Osborn turned the team back into self-serving villains posing as heroes that he used as a springboard for his rise to power.

I think he'd make for an excellent antagonist to Captain America as well seeing as how during Dark Reign we saw that Osborn truly sees himself as a Patriot and somebody who feels he has the world's best interests in mind. He's truly dangerous because he can be very persuasive to people who wll give him the time of day.


Remember when Norman tried to warn the Marvel U about the dangers of the Asgardians and their world and used that to justify attacking them? Fresh off of War of the realms you have to wonder how many folks in the Marvel U are thinking maybe Norman isn't all that crazy after all.

[Huntsman Spider]

I think he'd make for an excellent antagonist to Captain America as well seeing as how during Dark Reign we saw that Osborn truly sees himself as a Patriot and somebody who feels he has the world's best interests in mind. He's truly dangerous because he can be very persuasive to people who wll give him the time of day.


Remember when Norman tried to warn the Marvel U about the dangers of the Asgardians and their world and used that to justify attacking them? Fresh off of War of the realms you have to wonder how many folks in the Marvel U are thinking maybe Norman isn't all that crazy after all.

Norman isn't a patriot, he's a self-serving psychopath with a talent for manipulation, especially when it comes to public perception. That said, you do otherwise raise an excellent point --- plenty of great Captain America stories have shown him going up against villains who use patriotism as an excuse or justification for their crimes, so Osborn would strike Cap as being no different from those guys. I'd add as well that Osborn's big comeback scheme after Dark Reign was to paint the Avengers as corrupt hypocrites who had him illegally imprisoned because he embarrassed them, as opposed to all the horrible deeds he committed in the name of expanding his own power base even further. Given how recent events could well have soured the public (even more) on the Avengers and other heroes, I could see Osborn trying that angle again now that he's a free man, absolved of responsibility for his crimes while bonded with and "under the control of" the Carnage symbiote thanks to that new clandestine government agency JANUS.

[Spidey5640]

Probably in the minority but I think Norman worked best as strictly a NYC centered bad guy for Spidey. There was a time I really thought he should be a Lex Luthor level villain but Marvel has really overdone it with him. I think Tangled Web 13 portrays him as I see him best..top dog among Spidey's bad guys, and they know it

[Huntsman Spider]

Probably in the minority but I think Norman worked best as strictly a NYC centered bad guy for Spidey. There was a time I really thought he should be a Lex Luthor level villain but Marvel has really overdone it with him. I think Tangled Web 13 portrays him as I see him best..top dog among Spidey's bad guys, and they know it

That was a good issue. Of course he'd be top dog with Spidey's rogues, because he's done the most out of any of them to hurt Spidey on personal, emotional, and psychological levels that the others don't have the knowledge, the skill, or the will to touch.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I think Spider-Man's reasons for hating Osborn go a lot deeper than just not liking how Norman operates, given how much personal pain and misery Norman has inflicted on him over the years. That said, I'd think Iron Man would hate Osborn for the same reason he might have hated Stane and Hammer --- those guys are basically unreformed, unrepentant versions of the man he used to be, and Osborn is all that plus an unhinged murdering psychopath. If we got other heroes involved, I could see Daredevil hating him because Osborn frequently uses his money to twist the law so he never has to pay for the harm he's inflicted on others, which would deeply infuriate him as someone dedicated to the law even if he has to break it himself as a vigilante. Songbird would also have more personal reasons for hating Osborn, as the Thunderbolts were her chance to redeem herself and Osborn turned the team back into self-serving villains posing as heroes that he used as a springboard for his rise to power.

I doubt Norman will ever have a deeper relationship with another hero as he does with Spider-Man and for obvious reasons, but what I meant by different dynamics is that other heroes can potentially emphasize parts of Norman that maybe don't get as emphasized with Spider-Man. For example, there isn't a generational or class divide between Norman and Tony like there is between Norman and Peter. Also both Norman and Peter are Trickster archetypes and their fights are often about who is better at embodying that archetype, while Tony tends to dislike Tricksters due to them negatively impacting his sense of control. Norman and Tony even have things in common related to Peter, like the fact they both tried turning Peter into their protégé at one point and Peter outright rejected them. All of those things could inform Norman's interactions with Tony in a way that feels fresh without it altering Norman as a character or turning him into a non-Spider-Man villain.

[Tony Stark]

I think Spider-Man's reasons for hating Osborn go a lot deeper than just not liking how Norman operates, given how much personal pain and misery Norman has inflicted on him over the years. That said, I'd think Iron Man would hate Osborn for the same reason he might have hated Stane and Hammer --- those guys are basically unreformed, unrepentant versions of the man he used to be, and Osborn is all that plus an unhinged murdering psychopath. If we got other heroes involved, I could see Daredevil hating him because Osborn frequently uses his money to twist the law so he never has to pay for the harm he's inflicted on others, which would deeply infuriate him as someone dedicated to the law even if he has to break it himself as a vigilante. Songbird would also have more personal reasons for hating Osborn, as the Thunderbolts were her chance to redeem herself and Osborn turned the team back into self-serving villains posing as heroes that he used as a springboard for his rise to power.

I doubt Norman will ever have a deeper relationship with another hero as he does with Spider-Man and for obvious reasons, but what I meant by different dynamics is that other heroes can potentially emphasize parts of Norman that maybe don't get as emphasized with Spider-Man. For example, there isn't a generational or class divide between Norman and Tony like there is between Norman and Peter. Also both Norman and Peter are Trickster archetypes and their fights are often about who is better at embodying that archetype, while Tony tends to dislike Tricksters due to them negatively impact his sense of control. Norman and Tony even have things in common related to Peter, like the fact they both tried turning Peter into their protégé at one point and Peter outright rejected them. All of those things could inform Norman's interactions with Tony in a way that feels fresh without it altering Norman as a character or turning him into a non-Spider-Man villain.

You guys make some great points. I too want Osborn in Tony’s rogues gallery. Worlds Most Wanted showed how their dynamic was. Osborn always remembers anyone who crossed him or embarrassed him and Tony did both. I personally thought Dsrk Reign should have lasted longer. To me it proved that Osborn should be taken seriously as a threat to the MU as a whole.

[babyblob]

B) Goblin being elevated as a Marvel-Wide Villain should also be accompanied by a parallel elevation in Spider-Man. And ultimately it should be Spider-Man who takes him down.

I am late to the thread.

I dont agree with this 100 percent. what is the point of making Norman a Marvel big bad if the same hero who has always beat him is the one to take him down yet again. i am glad that it was someone other then Spiderman who too him down.

[Huntsman Spider]

I doubt Norman will ever have a deeper relationship with another hero as he does with Spider-Man and for obvious reasons, but what I meant by different dynamics is that other heroes can potentially emphasize parts of Norman that maybe don't get as emphasized with Spider-Man. For example, there isn't a generational or class divide between Norman and Tony like there is between Norman and Peter. Also both Norman and Peter are Trickster archetypes and their fights are often about who is better at embodying that archetype, while Tony tends to dislike Tricksters due to them negatively impacting his sense of control. Norman and Tony even have things in common related to Peter, like the fact they both tried turning Peter into their protégé at one point and Peter outright rejected them. All of those things could inform Norman's interactions with Tony in a way that feels fresh without it altering Norman as a character or turning him into a non-Spider-Man villain.

That could actually work.

You guys make some great points. I too want Osborn in Tony’s rogues gallery. Worlds Most Wanted showed how their dynamic was. Osborn always remembers anyone who crossed him or embarrassed him and Tony did both. I personally thought Dsrk Reign should have lasted longer. To me it proved that Osborn should be taken seriously as a threat to the MU as a whole.

Thanks, and generally agreed. It could be a situation somewhat similar to DC, where even though Lex Luthor is widely recognized as Superman's archenemy, he's also crossed paths with Batman/Bruce Wayne, and he and Batman would almost be kindred spirits in some ways if not for Batman being a hero and Lex (most of the time) being the villain.

I am late to the thread.

I dont agree with this 100 percent. what is the point of making Norman a Marvel big bad if the same hero who has always beat him is the one to take him down yet again. i am glad that it was someone other then Spiderman who too him down.

You raise an interesting point, even if Spider-Man did technically get the last punch in after Osborn had already been shut down by Captain America and Iron Man. That said, I'd see it more as a chance for raising Spider-Man's profile in-universe, as even though he's the most popular and beloved Marvel hero in real life, within the MU, he's a more controversial figure among the public and the authorities, and somewhat underestimated by many of his heroic peers.

[JTHM]

I would definitively enjoy a Lex Luthor-ish take on Norman Osborn yet again like in Dark Reign. It was a very interesting period and definitively one of the highlights of Norman. And it could help to revitalize him like it did way back then. I am sure I am in the minority here too, but I feel that Norman's act in Spider-Books has been kind of stale, I just don't get the same reaction out of him anymore and the fact he is coming back as the Green Goblin there in Spider-Man #850 couldn't cause me less hype. Not to say that I hate his Green Goblin persona, but mostly that I think it's just the same act when it comes to his rivalry with Spider-Man. He can play off of other characters just as good.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

You guys make some great points. I too want Osborn in Tony’s rogues gallery. Worlds Most Wanted showed how their dynamic was. Osborn always remembers anyone who crossed him or embarrassed him and Tony did both. I personally thought Dsrk Reign should have lasted longer. To me it proved that Osborn should be taken seriously as a threat to the MU as a whole.

I would definitively enjoy a Lex Luthor-ish take on Norman Osborn yet again like in Dark Reign. It was a very interesting period and definitively one of the highlights of Norman. And it could help to revitalize him like it did way back then. I am sure I am in the minority here too, but I feel that Norman's act in Spider-Books has been kind of stale, I just don't get the same reaction out of him anymore and the fact he is coming back as the Green Goblin there in Spider-Man #850 couldn't cause me less hype. Not to say that I hate his Green Goblin persona, but mostly that I think it's just the same act when it comes to his rivalry with Spider-Man. He can play off of other characters just as good.

I think a problem that comes up when discussing Norman is that there are kinda three different takes on Norman:

1. The sane mastermind & sociopath of Lee-Ditko, The Spectacular Spider-Man, and Modern Spider-Man Comics.
2. The insane 'lame dad' of Lee-Romita, Spider-Man TAS, and the first Sam Raimi film.
3. The Lex Luthor/Frank Underwood-esque sociopath from Dark Reign and World's Most Wanted.

The second take has mostly died out since Norman's resurrection, but I do agree that it's played out and not as interesting. I would go as far as to say that the second take doesn't work at all as a Spider-Man archenemy, as fun as an insane or split-personality Goblin may be. However, this Norman may or may not work well against other heroes. Hard to tell since no one has done it.

The third take is similar to the first, but this Norman doesn't view the Green Goblin as a core part of his identity or "real face". As cool as Dark Reign is, I question if the Norman from Revenge of the Green Goblin, A Death in the Family, and Marvel Knights: Spider-Man would want to wear an Iron Man suit long-term. Also while Spider-Man may not be looked as respected as Iron Man and Captain America in-universe, the Norman from those stories would probably still see him as an equal threat, or at least not think he is now above Spider-Man's pay grade.

To go back to Page 1, I think the bolded part sums up how Dark Reign Norman could have been more consistent and better:

I will say that Green Goblin becoming a Marvel-Wide villain could have been executed better in DARK REIGN and Thunderbolts, if
A) Bendis didn't make jokes about the Goblin costume and so on. Respect the Ditko. Respect the costume, and have the Goblin be the scariest, meanest, best version of Osborn.

B) Goblin being elevated as a Marvel-Wide Villain should also be accompanied by a parallel elevation in Spider-Man. And ultimately it should be Spider-Man who takes him down.

I dont agree with this 100 percent. what is the point of making Norman a Marvel big bad if the same hero who has always beat him is the one to take him down yet again. i am glad that it was someone other then Spiderman who too him down.

I don't think Spider-Man has to always take him down, but his relationship with Norman shouldn't feel superfluous if Spider-Man is in the story. Lex Luthor's dynamic with Superman doesn't dissapear or feel irrelevant when Lex is fighting the Justice League, even if Superman isn't the one who ultimately takes him down. The same goes with Batman whenever The Joker or Ra's stir DCU-level **** up.

Spider-Man's unclear status in the MU also makes it unclear how Norman would struggle with a high school teacher but take over the MU with ease.

[babyblob]

Spider-Man's unclear status in the MU also makes it unclear how Norman would struggle with a high school teacher but take over the MU with ease.

This could be explained with something as simple as Norman;s mental health and how he has an irrational rage and mindset with Spiderman. like how he is so focused on his destruction that he messes up and it leads to his defeat.

yet with the rest of the MU he does not have the personal stakes in those heroes. Like the hatred and desire for revenge. Just a desire to defeat them. That kind of mind set can make a huge difference.

[Huntsman Spider]

This could be explained with something as simple as Norman;s mental health and how he has an irrational rage and mindset with Spiderman. like how he is so focused on his destruction that he messes up and it leads to his defeat.

yet with the rest of the MU he does not have the personal stakes in those heroes. Like the hatred and desire for revenge. Just a desire to defeat them. That kind of mind set can make a huge difference.

A pretty solid point, I'll admit. Even in Thunderbolts, simply being reminded of Spider-Man further strained Norman's tenuous mental stability.

[babyblob]

A pretty solid point, I'll admit. Even in Thunderbolts, simply being reminded of Spider-Man further strained Norman's tenuous mental stability.

Thats what I mean. With Spiderman there is this blind rage. A desire not only to beat him but to destroy every part of him. With a hero like Captain America or Iron Man Norman would just see them as an obstacle standing in the way of a goal not a focus of insane wrath. He could make plans to over come them with a clear head. Or at least as clear of a head as Norman can have.

[JTHM]

I think a problem that comes up when discussing Norman is that there are kinda three different takes on Norman:

1. The sane mastermind & sociopath of Lee-Ditko, The Spectacular Spider-Man, and Modern Spider-Man Comics.
2. The insane 'lame dad' of Lee-Romita, Spider-Man TAS, and the first Sam Raimi film.
3. The Lex Luthor/Frank Underwood-esque sociopath from Dark Reign and World's Most Wanted.

The second take has mostly died out since Norman's resurrection, but I do agree that it's played out and not as interesting. I would go as far as to say that the second take doesn't work at all as a Spider-Man archenemy, as fun as an insane or split-personality Goblin may be. However, this Norman may or may not work well against other heroes. Hard to tell since no one has done it.

The third take is similar to the first, but this Norman doesn't view the Green Goblin as a core part of his identity or "real face". As cool as Dark Reign is, I question if the Norman from Revenge of the Green Goblin, A Death in the Family, and Marvel Knights: Spider-Man would want to wear an Iron Man suit long-term. Also while Spider-Man may not be looked as respected as Iron Man and Captain America in-universe, the Norman from those stories would probably still see him as an equal threat, or at least not think he is now above Spider-Man's pay grade.

To go back to Page 1, I think the bolded part sums up how Dark Reign Norman could have been more consistent and better:

I can see what you mean, and I do agree with that point. The idea of having Norman Osborn be similar to his ruthless, ambitious and chess master self in Dark Reign that pushed him to further heights. But have the Green Goblin be not just his insane persona but his worst face, his "final form" so to speak. It is certain that in Dark Reign, every time Norman slipped slightly back to his Green Goblin persona it was portrayed as detrimental to him. Like he was now a mastermind but if he returned to being the insane Green Goblin he would be less, and that's certainly not it. I liked the Spectacular Spider-Man take, where the Green Goblin was menacing, crazy but also calculating. And I think that could also work. Having Norman, both as Osborn and as the Green Goblin receive a more Marvel-wide push could even help Spider-Man's own standing, since if his own archnemesis can be such a threat for other heroes like Iron Man and Captain America, it would only make Peter look more impressive for all the times he took him down.

[Kaitou D. Kid]

I can see what you mean, and I do agree with that point. The idea of having Norman Osborn be similar to his ruthless, ambitious and chess master self in Dark Reign that pushed him to further heights. But have the Green Goblin be not just his insane persona but his worst face, his "final form" so to speak. It is certain that in Dark Reign, every time Norman slipped slightly back to his Green Goblin persona it was portrayed as detrimental to him. Like he was now a mastermind but if he returned to being the insane Green Goblin he would be less, and that's certainly not it. I liked the Spectacular Spider-Man take, where the Green Goblin was menacing, crazy but also calculating. And I think that could also work. Having Norman, both as Osborn and as the Green Goblin receive a more Marvel-wide push could even help Spider-Man's own standing, since if his own archnemesis can be such a threat for other heroes like Iron Man and Captain America, it would only make Peter look more impressive for all the times he took him down.

That was the problem. Bendis clearly doesn't like 616 Green Goblin and has a very Mark Millar-esque attitude about him not being edgy or 'realistic' enough (ironically, the actual Mark Millar likes him and wrote one of the best and meanest take on the Green Goblin in Marvel Knights). He has tried to reinvent Norman and move him away from the Green Goblin on two occasions now. The first was in Ultimate Spider-Man where he turned him into a generic demon, and the second was in Dark Reign.

I think it is very telling that neither reinvention was able to stick around long-term.