Jump to content

Talk:Doctor Octopus/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Inspired by Roy Orbison's Appearance

Obviously Marvel Comics was influenced by Roy Orbison, who had a hit with "Pretty Woman" in the early 1960's when drawing the face, glasses and hairstyle of Doctor Octopus. Although younger readers might not be aware of who Roy Orbison was; older people can see the similar appearance. One website asks the question: "Roy Orbison and Doctor Octopus -- Seperated at Birth?" Of course it's a joke. Bennett Turk

Doc Ock is likely the most inconsistantly portrayed character in Spider-Man comics. Ditko/Romita saw him as a fat, ugly troll of a man with big glasses, pudding-bowl hair and an ugly green jumpsuit. Andru and others reinvented him as a svelte, cigar-smoking con man with sunglasses and tuxedos. John Byrne saw Ock as a man with bionic limbs who walked around wearing what appeared to be an ornamental Chinese dress and no pants. Humberto Ramos (the worst, in my opinion) saw Ock as a middle-aged man with long greasy hair, tinted sunglasses and leather jackets - Ozzy Osbourne with tentacles. It's really hard to believe they're all supposed to be the same person. I personally think that the main picture of this article should be the "fat ugly troll" version rather than the "Ozzy" version, but I guess it's not my place to say. Good call on Roy Orbison, though. 142.161.206.195 19:41, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
There. I put up a picture that I feel is the definitive Doc Ock look. Hope you like it! 142.161.204.111 17:33, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Even "I" like it. DocOck 19:03, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Dead and alive again

Just like John Byrne reinvented the DC universe, where the adoptive parants of Superman were still alive, John Byrne reinvented much of the Marvel universe when he started to write Spider-Man stories in the 90's. And didn't he change the origin of Dr. Octopus and did some other changes in the early years of Spider-Man?

Yes, but it was considered a huge failure so Marvel no longer considers it in continuity.--CyberGhostface 19:21, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. Is this failure mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia or in any other articles? So far I havn't found anything about it. 193.217.195.151 17:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
Its never been officially mentioned by Marvel, but the fan opinion was overwhelmingly negative so its never been referenced again. For a while the titles referenced the Chapter 1 origin as canon but now they refer to Stan Lee's classic one.--CyberGhostface 17:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, so it's just a part of the past Marvel wants to forget then. And with all the Ultimate titles, they no longer needs to reinvent Spider-Man or other characters in the original Marvel universe. (But still, in my opinion it should be mentioned, just so the fans knows what issues they shall ignore and which ones that are included in the continuity, just to avoid confusion. Especially if the reinvention effort includes more than the stories created by John Byrne and more titles than Sider-Man.) 193.217.194.254 00:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Doctor Octopus: Year One

This article, when talking about how Doc Ock's origins and how he controls his actuators, goes into great detail about the original Lee/Ditko story. However, it says absolutely nothing concerning the retcon/retelling of his origin story in Spider-Man/Doctor Octopus: Year One (2004-2005). In that generally very well accepted - even praised by some - story, Octavius gains access to military funding to create "cyborg" technology to rival the powers of existing superheroes and supervillains. This culminates in a set of arms that was neurally-controlled from the start. The nuclear accident still happened; however, instead of granting him perfect neural control, it actually damaged the systems so that they acted on subconscious signals as opposed to conscious thought. Eventually, Octavius evidently learns how to regain total control of the arms, although it is never directly mentioned in the story.

As well, it also has a scene where Octavius nearly dies of radiation poisoning caused by the accident, but seems to be saved by it instead in a dream-like sequence where he seems to gain its power. The story also chronicles what seems to be an obsession with the atomic bomb from childhood, scattering in sequences where Octavius sees the people around him destroyed in an imagined nuclear blast. There are also a few other small changed details.

As far as I know, this retelling of Octavius's origins has not been discredited like some of the other retellings before it. At the very least, we should have some of the information this comic miniseries brought to light represented in the article along with the original Lee/Ditko story. -- Keith Davies Lehwald 01:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Fat Sexy Stripper

So, in Spider-Man 2, why is the main image of Doctor Octopus this images where his bear-chest is exspodes? Even the Spider-Man 2 toys, Doctor Octopus doesn't close up his inner jacket like he does in most of the movie. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.75.175.239 (talk) 14:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

What are you talking about? Its the movie poster. His chest isn't shown.--CyberGhostface 19:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but all the Spider-Man 2 toys shows is chest, and they show his chest in many other places.

New DP?

Anyone prefer any of these for the new DP?

1

2

3 (classic)

JackOfHearts 23:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, no. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.161.2.182 (talk) 04:18, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MKDOCOCK.jpg

Image:MKDOCOCK.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Doctoroctopus.png

Image:Doctoroctopus.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ultimatedoctoroctopus.JPG

Image:Ultimatedoctoroctopus.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Goodbyeock.jpg

Image:Goodbyeock.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Doctor Octopus' tentacles

This article says that the accident bonded the harness to his skin and nervous system so he is able to control it mentally. How is he able to control the arms before that? (User:Graham P.)

There was a control panel on the harness, as I recall. --Paul A 04:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Is there any explanation given about how these arms are actually supposed to be powered?--84.60.120.252 08:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I checked a marvel wiki and it states that "The motors get their power from a small nuclear-powered thermo-electric generator, which can provide several hundred watts per hour for up to five years before needing to replece its U-239 core".

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 04:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Adding WP:ROBO tag

...after talking with User:Hiding. If we can help, let us know. (P.S. Not watchlisting for now) - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Is this because of the arms? Not that I know, but does that really constitute a "robot"? Anakinjmt (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
We're a very small wikiproject at the moment, so opinions about what we want to tag could change as we grow. For now, the articles we're tagging that concern fiction are the ones that have an impact on the public's hopes and fears concerning robotics. The Spiderman film was recent and had a huge audience, and the arms seem robotic to me. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 17:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Third Doctor Octopus???

I don't have the issues in front of me, but should we mention the new Doctor Octopus who tried to kill and replace the original in a recent Amazing Spider-Man by JMS a year or two back? --JRT 19:57, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dunno if it should be added or not, but here's a reference! [1] --El benito 20:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

That's Luke Caryle. (JoeLoeb (talk) 00:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC))

Movie/Game Diffrences

Should this page mention the diffrences concerning Doc Ock between the movie Spider-Man 2, and the game Spider-Man 2? BassxForte 23:25, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

In the videos game section we can probably mention the differences...although, there aren't really that much. I recall some extra dialogue and more references to Rosie but his character was mostly unchanged.--CyberGhostface 01:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

A few changes I noticed when I played through the game...

  • Game:Doc Ock believes it's Spider-Man's fault his experiment failed.
  • Game:Doc Ock blames Spider-Man (or as he calls him... "murdering arachnid") for Rosie's death.
  • Game:Doc Ock initially has a shield in the warehouse the final battle occurs in.
  • Game:Spider-Man's mask comes off earlier in the last battle, since Doc Ock believes Spider-Man ruined his experiment he comes to the connection that Peter was "sabatoging me all along."
  • Game:There's only a few mentions of the fact the tentacles are controlling him, in the final scene Doc Ock doesn't fight the tentacles influence... he just says "What have we done? What have *I* done?" and sets about to destroy the warehouse in an attempt at redemption after telling Peter that it wasn't Peter's fault his experiment failed, or that Rosie died, but "My hubris... my vanity cost Rosie her life."

An extra trivial note, not directly releated to Doc Ock, in the movie Rosie dies when a shard of glass hits her, in the game she dies when a bolt of plasma hit her. BassxForte 22:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

This movie version is very different from the mainstream. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.204.191 (talk) 20:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Question's about Serena Patel

Just a quick question involving the character, Serena Patel, the 2099 Doctor Octopus.

1) She's Indian right? because her last name is Patel. She could be born an American

2) Is this site official site or fan site?, http://marvel.wikia.com/Main_Page, Because someone argued that Serena is full American by this, http://marvel.wikia.com/Serena_Patel_(Earth-928)

--SilentmanX (talk) 15:03, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Doctor Octopus

We really need more eyes on Doctor Octopus. First of all, we have IP users trying to do a copy and paste move to Otto Octavius. Additionally, we have people editing the article to favor the brand-new "Superior Spider-Man" material over the 50-year history of Doc Ock. We might need admin intervention after a while. 24.12.74.21 (talk) 13:33, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Doctor Octopus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:34, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Doctor Octopus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Copied from Marvel.com

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't it frowned upon to use text copied from other sources as the main text of a Wikipedia article? Much of Doc Ock's Character biography is directly copied, or mostly copied with some paraphrasing, from his page on Marvel.com[2]. -- Pennyforth 17:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it would appear that the Marvel.com article was copied from here. Looking for the relatively rare phrase "turbulent upbringing", you can see that it was added to this Wikipedia article in an edit back in November 2005. [3] Another edit later that month rephrased that sentence to it's current form. [4] The earliest diff for the Marvel.com's Doc Ock article that I can find is from April 2006. [5] Given that the phrasing of the Wikipedia article evolved over time whereas the Marvel one seems to have appeared wholesale, it seems unlikely that there was plagiarism on the Wikipedia side. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 03:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
What about the mention of Devil's Breath in this article? I know what it is, but readers of this article are never told what devil's breath is. 2600:8805:230A:9700:F9CD:9BEE:BD96:3083 (talk) 01:32, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Durability?

There is something about Doc Ock that I've never understood, and that is, does he have superhuman durabiltiy? I noticed long ago that, despite his metal arms, he himself is still a normal human. Yet, in his battles with other superpowered beings, particularly Spider-Man, he not only survives, but remains conscious and still capable of fighting even after being hit numerous times during a fight, when even when pulling his punches Spider-Man can knock a normal person unconscious with only a couple of blows. Do they ever give an explaination for this, and if so, what is it and it should be mentioned in the article under powers and abilities.66.41.44.102 (talk) 11:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is all fantasy. You must read the old comics from Stan Lee. But it still make fun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.204.191 (talk) 20:55, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
80.141.204.191, either say something relevent to the question or don't comment.66.41.44.102 (talk) 15:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I think all his limbs are cybernetically enhanced as well 2600:8805:230A:9700:F9CD:9BEE:BD96:3083 (talk) 01:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Doctor_Octopus/Archive_1&oldid=1062205676"