http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/
imo, less than 8 years since the first is just not enough to reboot a darn franchise. You can smell the putrid tang of the itchy executives behind Deathly Hallows already. It reeks.
Printable View
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/
imo, less than 8 years since the first is just not enough to reboot a darn franchise. You can smell the putrid tang of the itchy executives behind Deathly Hallows already. It reeks.
No Sam Raimi = FAIL
I was unhappy when I first heard, but I've kinda made peace with it. It's pretty early for a total reboot I agree. Kinda wish they would have just skipped the whole origin story and just had everyone do their thing. And we're losing JK Simmons as Jameson, which almost has me giving up on it right away.
A few things I like about this:
The Lizard: I've been waiting for Connors to turn into the lizard since the first movie. Bout time.
Gwen Stacey: IMO, a much more interesting character than Mary Jane
The fact that they're actually continuing the franchise: Spiderman is too big of a series to sum up in three movies. X-men was able to put most of their best characters in four movies, but with Spidey, we only got four villains, leaving out some real classic characters. I would have preferred Spiderman 4, but, ehh.
Keep in mind that Punisher and Hulk got reboots only five years after the originals, so this isn't a new thing.
However, no JK Simmons? Auto-fail. They have to make an exception for him. He defined the series fgs.
Please explain.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
Pfft, I'll just wait for the next reboot.
Actually, screw that, I'll wait for the one after the next one. They'll fucking nail that one, I just know it.
never a big fan of spiderman, always though batman looked more like a spider than he did..
spidermans got the look of a strawberry that got caught in a spidersweb though
Rather than a reboot, I think they should do a later day Spider-man... Spiderman in his 40's... With Tom Cruise as Spiderman! I always thought he would be a good Peter Parker!
My pleasure...Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
...err..umm...well. I just found out this "new" Spider-Man" is not Warner Bros, but Columbia Pics. But I still retain my original point. Someone out there simply wants to milk the franchise (spider-man) to the last. I meant Warner Bros. executives at first, but you get my point. There's a reason they waited forever to release Deathly Hallows, and there's a reason why they only gave us half the goods. Heck, have you seen the Deathly Hallows part 1? I've seen shorter movies get cut for their lag scenes.
Anyways, I still gave Deathly Hallows a chance; so the same will go for SM-4. I still disdain the fact that I might be getting half the goods for twice the bucks; know what I mean? I have to agree with Why-Disciple, though. The Lizard shoud've been in the original trilogy. And the fact that Rhys Ifans is playing him is probably the only reason why I might give this one a try.
Well, having seen it, I'm not going to be completely naive and try to claim that they did it solely to retain as much as the book's credibility as possible (see movies #3 thru #6 to see how bowdlerized you can get in three hours), but still... It's the final chapter of one of the most popular series of novels ever. I can see how they would want to make it as long as possible to make sure they remained as true to the novel as possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
And yes, I'm sure the guys who wrote the checks patted each other on the backs when they realized that they'd essentially be selling us two tickets for one movie. But answer me this: would you be willing to pay twice the normal ticket price if they released it as one 5-6 hour movie?
Ah, a fine example of the Sonic 3 & Knuckles conundrum.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
Also, is this thread supposed to just be disdain for the new Spiderman, or disdain for anything? I've got disdain for a few things, but not really for the Spiderman reboot... because that means they can bring Venom back and not kill him immediately :D
I just wanna know why Spider-Man 3 was so crappy after Spider-Man 2 was so awesome.
Rush job. Venom thrown in. Raimi wanting to go back to his roots but stuck doing this. It's not a fun story.
Even Raimi is smart enough to know you do the guaranteed money maker so you can get the greenlight to do the stuff you really want to do.
I hope they start midway somewhere like the second hulk movie, and just assume the origin stuff that everybody knows and has seen fifty billion times has already happened. Reboots seem to be popular. Here's hoping Ghost Rider gets a reboot with Nick Cage being booted off the bike. This time try to make it spooky, scary (hint*Midnight Sons*hint) and less campy.
It could've been worse.. They could've adapted the storyline "One More Day" for the silver screen! :yuck:
I hold some disdain for anti-Biebers, although it's mostly pity I have for them. He does not smile upon thee heresy.
I don't see why they don't just make Spider-Man 4 using the established cast & crew. #3 wasn't perfect, but it was hardly the franchise-killing debacle that Batman & Robin was. Matter of fact, if you nix the embarrassing schtick with "Dark Parker" and maybe split the story into two movies (with Venom getting a full movie) it could have been as good as #2.
On a sidenote, I really liked Tofer Grace. He probably would have made a better Peter Parker than what's-his-face.
Hopefully it'll be an improvement on the horrendous Sam Raimi movies, but I doubt it :(
Still Gwen Stacy in it, but no Mary Jane, sounds like there's the possibility of it being a serious attempt at a proper re-boot, but I imagine they'll just kill her at the end of the movie or something :Panda:
Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
This is also a response to your previous reply...
would you be willing to pay twice the normal ticket price if they released it as one 5-6 hour movie?
Well, I think the best answer would be that I'd always prefer longer movies when it comes to Fantasy, Adventure and SciFi (Shorter when it comes to horror,thrillers,dramas, action and comedies).
I had a whole lotta disdain when you said you left.Quote:
Originally Posted by beef jerky man
This. I don't get why there's so much hate for the 3rd movie. It wasn't near as good as the first two, but it was still enjoyable overall. Disappointing is all. I was honestly expecting that they'd take this route and end the series with the marriage instead of starting all over. Makes more sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
...and we're back at Harry Potter. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
To answer my own question, I probably wouldn't pay twice the ticket price for a 5-6 hour movie, but in certain circumstances, I'd be willing to pay a few bucks more.
That's for one continuous movie, though (Deathly Hallows, for example). In Spider-man's case, I think it would have worked pretty well with a 150min film devoted to Parker's struggle with the dark suit, ending in something of a cliff hanger with the suit changing hosts. The story is just too good to cram into one movie, and Venom is too much of a fan favorite to be delegated to cameo status.
And as long as we're rewriting the movie, I would have changed the Two-Face/Riddler partnership of Sandman and Venom. That was pretty lame.
^ See, that scene just wasn't okay.
Ditto the "Daddy-O" scene in the club.
Thinking about it I'm actually very thankfull that Tobey Maguire is no longer playing Spider-Man, everytime I think of him I get this image in my head
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/5965/peterparker.png
I feel disdain because that scene didn't maximize its comedy potential.
Thanks to YouTube, and some poor video, that scene now delivers the proper amount of yuks.
Am I the only person alive who thought the emo-Peter scene was great?! Just watching that video makes me laugh out loud. It's Spiderman... it's supposed to be funny!
Well it depends on who you talk to. The way I see it, it was painfully awkward to see little Petey Parker trying to be a ladies man and walk with some swagger. It would have been funny but knowing that everyone involved in making the movie was totally fucking serious about those scenes drains the humor for me. It wasn't funny because it wasn't intended to be funny is what I am trying to say.
Whhhaaaaaaatttt? Tobey McGuire is dancing around on a New York street creeping out good-looking women... I don't think that represents a "serious" scene. Again, it was very much intended to be cheesy, and therefore intended to be funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
Humor is subjective, I'm not stating that it's a fact that it was funny and all other opinions are wrong, but I thought it was hilarious and one of the better parts of that movie.
I found it to be an odd and awkward scene is all. Every time I see it, I can't help but facepalm.
Do you want to throw down over this?!?
I agree with that. Spiderman is a lighthearted series for the most part (unlike Batman for instance) so I felt it was just a tongue-in-cheek sort of change of pace after he blows up Harry's face. I mean, did anyone really want to take the movie seriously to begin with? I know I watched Spiderman 1-2 just expecting some good action scenes and cool characters n such. Can't imagine why everyone thinks it's such a horrible thing. I mean, the same kind of thing happens in the comic where his personality changes, right?
You wanna go? I swear to god I will uppercut you so hard, your head will go flying into the fucking Stratosphere. I will then work out the various equations to figure out where your head will land and right before your head does land, I will kick you in your goddamn face, punting your head back into the Stratosphere and I will keep repeating this until there is a fucking UN resolution to stop me.Quote:
Originally Posted by InternalPrimate
Gosh MS, that seems like an awful lot of effort. Wouldn't it be quicker and easier to just shank him?
My disdain comes from this entire faggot-ass series(not that there is anything wrong with faggot-asses). WTF, Sam Raimi only made a few good movies. Evil Dead series and Darkman.
Just like Peter Jackson only made 3 good movies. Bad Taste, Meet the Feebles, and Dead Alive(Braindead in non-U.S. countries).
That "Dead is dead" attitude is why you fail. Unlike you, I take pride in the murders I commit. Hell, I once murdered a man delivering the remains of the last guy I murdered.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
ITT: Posts my future bitch ex-wife will use to convince the courts I am an unfit father. The bitch.
You're dead wrong. The difference between us is that you're just a punk kid (probably) still without a job and (probably) still living at home with your parents. Even after you graduate, you're still going to have two or three years of just coasting through life until you develop enough sense to become an actual contributing member of society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Metal_Sonic
I, on the other hand, have a full-time job and a family, both of which demand a significant amount of my time. Between school & daycare and trying to keep my house from imploding under the strain of the 12-hour days my wife and each work, I also manage to squeeze in stamp-collecting and reading to the elderly.
See, I simply don't have time for leisurely, drawn-out homicides. It's not about style or pride in one's work: it's about fitting everything into a 24-hour day.
Jerk.
Judge if you want. We are all going to die.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
I intend to deserve it.
Metal, you are out classed and outgunned when you throw down with stamp collectors.
Best to walk away.