I don't often get time to relax but, thankfully, I did this week. And what I did was take myself to the cinema to watch Kraven The Hunter. For the uninitiated, Kraven The Hunter is the film adaptation of the Marvel Comics character of the same name, who is a Spider-Man villain. Be it known that I'm a big Spidey film; still owning some several hundred original-issue comics primarily across three Spider-Man titles: The Amazing Spider-Man, The Spectacular Spider-Man, and Web Of Spider-Man. Some of these issues are landmark in both Spider-Man's history, and therefore as collectibles. These include Harry Osborn on drugs, the death of Kraven The Hunter (a six-comic arc in which he finally committed suicide by rifle), and Venom's first appearance.
The film deals with Kraven's origin and how he comes to be Kraven The Hunter. This is the sixth film which features characters from Spider-Man's comic universe, and it includes The Rhino, The Chameleon, The Foreigner, and Calypso. Spider-Man himself doesn't feature ...despite this cinematic universe referred to as Sony's Spider-Man Universe (SSU), since Sony owns the film rights to the Spider-Man character. Given the deal with Sony and Marvel Studios that brought Spidey into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, or MCU, Sony decided they could bring other characters from Spider-Man's world to the big screen.
I never really rated Kraven as a Spider-Man villain. Sure, he's got enhanced strength, speed, stamina and such; but only to the level where he can beat up most regular men, as opposed to supermen. Strong as he may be - and the comics pitch him as an comparatively older character - he's nowhere near the strength class of someone like Spider-Man, who can lift 10 tons. That being said, I still wanted to check out the film firsthand, so off I went.
Adaptations of comic book characters, regardless of whether they're the central comic book character or not have their work cut out for them. Why? Because the source material has such a devoted following that anything less than a masterful representation on screen is in for a scathing rebuke. So, how about a film that features a Spider-Man villain but not Spider-Man himself?
Hmmmm.
The Venom films (of which there are three), by many accounts, appear to have done good box office even if they haven't had glowing reviews. Venom first appeared in the arc of The Amazing Spider-Man, issues 298 - 300, where ultimately Peter Parker goes back to his red and blue costume, since, 'it's impossible to get Venom's suit away from him.' This arc is solid and sets up why Venom is such a threat - partly because he's a rare exception that doesn't trigger Parker's Spider-Sense. Plus, Venom is much stronger than Spidey, so every time they tussle in the comics, it's pretty much divine intervention that Spidey isn't killed - and there is actually an issue where Spidey only wins by letting Venom think that he actually died. Yes, Venom appears to be a big fan favourite. Not so much for me. But, anyhow.
You then have the remaining films in the SSU: Morbius, Madame Web, and Kraven The Hunter. All of these I've seen ...and all of these I found disappointing. I'm not the only one. But then, I'm cut from different cloth, since the theatrical cut of the Ben Affleck movie Daredevil is quite possibly my favourite superhero film of all time. But let's dissect Kraven here.
As a supervillain, I wouldn't put Kraven in the class of some of Spidey's rogue gallery. He has stronger than a regular human, and has a hunter's sense of tactics, but he doesn't have the physical strength and cold intelligence of Dr. Octopus, or the cunning of the Hobgoblin, the savagery of Vermin, or the maniacal contempt and love of violence of the Scorpion. Truth told, the comic book version of Kraven has, in my opinion, precious little going for him, apart from that 6-book saga where he shot and buried Spider-Man and took down Vermin single-handed; note that Vermin is someone that Spidey only bested previously with help from Captain America. Once Kraven felt he had proven himself superior, he then swallowed a rifle barrel and blew out the back of his head. I can remember one particular letter to the editors about that issue, the response being, 'Kraven was a villain and he was insane. We do not advocate the actions of villains, especially insane ones.'
It's a big ask to watch a comic book film without considering the source material. Kraven The Hunter with no Spider-Man? In the comics, Kraven rarely makes it entertaining. But in the film with him as the main focus? The film goes some way to showing his superhuman strength, savagery, agility and such. But the tone and pacing is uneven, the casting in some instances is baffling (and I'm sorry, but that is NOT the Foreigner) and some of the central characters are uninspired, from their physicality to their M.O. The Chameleon, for example, is so slight in comparison to regular men, let alone the buff and rippling Kraven. As per the source material, what makes the Chameleon dangerous is not only his talent for mimicry, but as he himself tells it in the comics, it's his will.
I've never written for an IP (intellectual property), but if there were one particular IP I'd love to write for, it'd be Spider-Man. Favourite Spidey villains I'd choose from would be the Scorpion, the Human Fly, Electro, and the Lizard. Even as I sit here writing this, I have at least one story idea for all of them. In service to those characters, and as a bona fide fan ever since I was a kid, I'd like to think I could do the story justice. And despite my misgivings on Kraven as a comic-book character, I don't feel the film did him justice. But then, given that the film has no Spider-Man in it, I doubt it'll harm the comics reputation (especially given the comics' legacy). No risk of property damage there. But I can't say the same for the rep of the cast, directors, producers, or studio. Movie history is rife with stories of properties adapted for the screen that failed to hit the mark by varying degrees. Just look at video games; Street Fighter, for one. The array of Mortal Kombat films, for another.
Anyhow.
Given the failings of such films on release, part of me wonders why they ever get made in the first place, if they're such critical or commercial failures. I mean, it's a film about the villain, rather than the hero - and yes, I'm aware that a villain may not see themselves as a villain. Specifically as an author, this is one of those things that I keep in mind - I can't be slouching on a story I write. If I were to get careless and think maybe I could just half-ass it, all I need do to get back on track is ponder any number of big-screen adaptations of a superhero - or supervillain, for that matter - and dwell on the critical and commercial reception. Again, those two gates of quality: would I gladly put my name to it. And would I gladly part with my hard-earned money to buy it?
Comments