May 6, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Keaton really had the coolest costume.
We don’t know where Nolan’s going to land Batman until we see The Dark Knight Rises. Tough call, but I only see a couple ways to avoid the “been there, done that” feeling “Amazing Spider-man” is suffering from.
Batman The Animated Series tackled this problem well when the team behind the series created Batman Beyond. Beyond is set like 60 years in the future from The Animated Series. Bruce Wayne is in his 60s/70s, unable to continue the mission for a long time. He recruits a teenage kid to train and become a new Batman, in a higher tech suit than ever before, to tackle the ever increasing corruption in future Gotham.
Could be great movie material. Young actor for a new Batman, I’m thinking Clint Eastwood for the old Bruce Wayne. Would be a version of Batman most people have never seen before.
But WB won’t do that now. They have to tie the Batman reboot into Justice League. The way to reboot Batman in the larger universe is to show him as the commander of the team. No grief from the parents, that is long gone, more a strategic & military hard-ass. He’s way past the outward loner bit, Gotham is tiny, no longer his primary concern. He’s got to eliminate corruption at the world level as evidenced by President Luthor. Luthor’s “election” is a wake up call that Bruce has been thinking to small. Luthor is like Romney, but turned up to 11. He’s a billionaire, finance titan & former (still…) weapons manufacture for the US government (and others?…). Superman thinks he’s in charge of the Justice League, because he has the powers & experience with Luthor, but Bruce’s toys are now the Justice League members themselves, with Superman his best weapon. Bruce keeps Clark in check with Wayne Corp’s own arsenal of Kryptonite weapons if the need ever arises (Luthor might know about these without Bruce knowing…). So Bruce doesn’t trust anyone, the team thinks he does, and resolving that problem could cost Earth.
The problem is that we’re not being real clear with our terms. I don’t think the reboot on Spiderman is the problem, it’s the recycling of 50% of a movie that is really well known. If Amazing Spiderman didn’t bother with the origin, there would be like 90% fewer complaints about it being a reboot.
I have no problem with a Spiderman reboot. I have no problem with a Batman reboot.
When it’s handled poorly at the script stage, then yeah, people are going to complain about reboots. Whether Webb, Garfield and Stone are enough to overcome that big fucking problem, well, we’ll see.
Keaton to Kilmer to Clooney can’t really be called a reboot. They shared common actors and only recast the roles of Harvey Dent and Batman.
Rebooting to Bale was fresh because Nolan actually honored the comic-book/animated series origin, more or less, and the character as seen in contemporary comics.
What murdocdv and Mike said above. A new Spider-man that simply acknowledged Spider-man already exists in this universe would be less problematic, plus we all wanted to see Dylan Baker be the Lizard. And a new Batman will have to acknowledge the larger DC Universe if DC wants to be at Marvel’s level (the Kilmer/Clooney ones acknowledged Metropolis and Superman existed, but only in one-liners).
Imagine how hateful the Bond series would be if we had to see a new origin every time there was another actor. We know who Spidey is. We get it. Not every superhero story needs to start at the beginning.
Who is not expecting a new Batman?
Batman and Spiderman are now like Bond, there will never be a day in our lifetime when the next project is not in development, whether it is a sequel or a reboot or whatever. As long as they are able to keep it fresh and offer new takes they both have villians aplenty to keep the franchises going. Not looking forward to them tying it into a larger universe but happy enough with the Nolan’s that they are more than welcome to do a different take on it for awhile.
I would however love to see one last Burton/Keaton one, the cycle never really felt completed.
The Gwen Stacy angle intrigues me. Her story does not end well (unless they change it). It will be interesting to see if they take the challenge of following the comic book.
Yeah, keep Burton as far away as possible from Batman. Thank you very much. If they are going to reboot Batman, then using the Spidey template is a good idea. Why is it a good idea? Not everyone loves Nolan’s take on the character. A lot of people do, but there’s a completely different way to play Batman.
The reason why Amazing Spidey is successful, is how it builds on a familiar origin. It’s not the same as Raimi’s movies because this movie, lacks all the bullshit that kept Raimi’s movies from being truly enjoyable. It removes all of that nonsense, gives us a better romance, and better everything else.
Rebooting Batman could give us Damien, it could give us a Gotham that is not cured by politics, but a Gotham that needs the BAT FAMILY to fight the cure it’s ills. Seriously, if Warners aren’t trying to figure a way to put Kate Kane in there, then they aren’t trying hard enough.
Whatever the case, there is a better way to tell a Batman story like Amazing Spidey shows there is a better way to tell a Spidey story, and hopefully the reboot of Bats is familiar but different.
I thought the romance of the Amazing Spidey was one of the biggest disappointments. It starts off well enough but then develops into nothing.
**Spoiler Territory** – They didn’t even go out on a non-date date. We see the same sorta cliché of the fair maiden dabbing her hero’s wounds. Which I get when you’ve got some guy who’s on the lamb but a little bit creepy for hs students. Then, did I hear right when they were kissing and stop and go “What is this? What are we doing here?” BLEEEECCCCHHHH!!!!! Chemistry may’ve been there for the talent but then what? There’s no push and pull over whether or not they can be together. In the first two installments, the very thing that caused Peter & MJ to long to be together, why they were so right for each other, was the very reason why it was dangerous or that they couldn’t be together. I don’t need to see the same thing but let’s get some insight into a fresh and unique relationship. This was standard faire underappreciated female star in a male action film. What took place to distinguish their romance?
My problem was this last Amazing only had new players but didn’t do anything “new.” Nothing. It wasn’t terribly contemplative, yet what’s the point of showing the transformation if it’s only physical and not internal as well. I don’t need Hamlet’s soliloquy but Spidey 2 showed how burdened Peter was w/his new ability and responsibilities there in. Same w/the last two Batman movies. This one had what? A few lines, a posthumous speech, and someone appearing to make a choice but there being no clear option #2 for what he gives up to go after the villian. Meh, big deal.
** END POSSIBLE SPOILERS **
I agree w/John. There’s no need to start from scratch each time.
Triple, your response about romance is why people online discussing romance, is so annoying. That’s how two people act: awkwardly. I know every couple on screen are supposed to be super awesome and amazing; and not have human failings. Unfortunately, that’s bullshit, and real people are awkward in these situations. Their awkwardness is more genuine and real, than anything Raimi ever put in any of his films. If you don’t like the awkwardness of it all, then I am sure you are one suave man who gets it done right. Some of us, not as suave, and that’s how we respond to beautiful women talking to us. Especially beautiful women interested in us.
Oh yeah, what took place to distinguish their romance? IT’S NOT FAKE BULLSHIT. It’s not Spidey needing MJ to let him be in a relationship with her. It’s not walking away from her at a funeral. It’s real, tangible, and different in every single way. You siting the shitty examples from Raimi’s films makes me wonder how you could enjoy such bullshit? Seriously, everything about MJ and Peter Parker in Raimi’s films, is such shit that it’s astounding anyone could site it as having any meaning.
Now, if you think Amazing Spidey does not have anything new, then you really aren’t paying attention. Everything about it is different from any of those hamfisted Raimi movies, which did not show any real dealings with heroism, and if you are holding onto that dead weight: good for you. The moment this film ended, I felt so relieved to finally live in a world where they got Spidey right on film.
If you think it’s meh, then you obviously missed the point. Go buy those Raimi films on BD for 9.99 at Best Buy, and enjoy them. My Spidey is Garfield, and may his reign be a long one.
I said it started out well. The awkwardness was great, the start of something magical, but then…?
Garfield was his own man, so to speak. No qaulms w/him. What’s Peter’s real arc? What’s his lesson learned?
I do wonder if I would’ve enjoyed this film more if I hadn’t seen the first two. When I watch Batman Begins I wasn’t reminded of any of the previous Batman movies. Amazing has the same template as not just the first spidey but any other action and/or old man doesn’t like daughter’s bf movie. A couple of things at the end I wasn’t expecting but despite the talent, this one never stepped out of the original two films’ shadow.
Hello? Is this on? Yes it did step out of those shadows, because those two films are hampered by Raimi. He drags them into hell, and they never break free of his ham-fisted dialogue, direction, and those scripts. Which isn’t his fault but my god, are they both bad in terms of being for a Spider-man movie. Why you are judging those two films against this one, is sort of ridiculous given that this film is totally different in almost every aspect from the cast, to the origin, and to the villain. The Gawker review does a great job of explaining the heroism in this movie. Please read it.
You also seems to be missing, that the awkwardness is there, because their relationship is magical. Do you need them explaining how much they enjoyed kissing one another a bit more? Do you need more shots of the way they stare one another? Again, that’s how these things works in real life, and wanting something more cinematic ignores why this romance works compared to the failed MJ and Peter relationship in Raimi’s Spidey movies, because it’s comes across as being a real thing, and not some contrivance. Gwen is also not lied to about Pete’s secret, figures out why he’s acting the way he is, and in that moment this Pete and Gwen are more real than Raimi ever portrayed his Pete and MJ.
So when do we get the expected David Downer negative review of the new Spidey?
I agree with the “reboot Batman like Bond” approach. Just land in a world where Batman’s already there. I’d keep the Nolan universe events in place (plenty of Batman villains in the gallery yet; Penguin, Riddler, Clayface, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, Mad Hatter to name a few) and just keep going.
But yeah, you know Justice League will get here soon, and they’ll probably throw a ton of money at Bale to team up with Henry Cavill and company.
There was a Justice League issue I read a while ago where all the heroes were detained and the bad guy was in their headquarters, except Batman was in there. And the villain had all these powers and figured he’d win easily but Batman sat there calmly with an evil smile when Superman from the outside explained that of all of them, Batman was the one he did not want to be locked in a room with becuz he was the only one without mercy. I remember it because it was shortly after that I read Watchmen and instantly recognized Rorschach as the Batman-type.
OK, I really liked the Raimi films — especially the first one. So if JSP is trashing them — I guess I shouldn’t trust his judgment about the new Spider-Man movie, right?
One thing that will affect rebooting is box office. If Spidey and Batman can be rebootted every few years and earn at least $500M worldwide each (with at least one earning $1b), then the studios will continue it. But all it takes is one to earn less (ala Superman Returns) and all bets are off. Even with the Spidey reboot and the saved millions ($50?), the price tag is still enormous. Superman is beloved and had many past successes, but no one would have thought a Supes movie would earn less than $400M, but it did. Could easily replace Supes with Spidey and Bats in the previous sentence.
JS loved them before hated them. Fickle finger of fate..
Mark Duplass is in every movie this year – hes a writer / actor / director – have him do a Batman reboot.
my favorite Superman movie was with that General Zod guy. he was creepy and crazy and had a cool beard . we need bad guys we can remmeber for a long time.
the saw movies aren’t the greatest but everybody remembers that puppet jigsaw.
so let batman fight jigsaw with the paranormal guys directing.
i’ve got some great ideas …
JS loved them before hated them. Fickle finger of fate..
Ain’t that the truth. He was screaming emo-Amazing-Twilight since the first trailer. Now, “it gives us a better romance”. Sweet geezus.
Whatever the case, there is a better way to tell a Batman story…
So, roughly two weeks from release and Nolan is still wrong. Got it.
As for Reboot, I’ve said it before; JLA is the reboot. Spidey isn’t the template to follow anymore, Avengers is.
Drop Wayne, focus on Batman and Superman at the center. Cavill is under contract, so that’s a done deal. Have them put the League together, 3D Imax, and say hello to a Billion.
The problem for WB is if they go the Alien Invader villain route, the Avengers copycat factor is going to be insurmountable since Avengers 2 and JLA should be within a year of each other.
And it won’t be Luthor directly, the character is a played out joke.
They would be better served following Abrams Trek conceit with parallel worlds, since that’s sort of the genesis point of the DCU, what, 50 years ago.
for the record, i liked both Spiderman and Spiderman 2 a lot. I think they do a fantastic job of taking comic books to the big screen in a way that captures the manic energy and fun tone of Silver Age marvel stories.
I think Mark Webb made a very interesting character drama based on Spiderman. I think Raimi made a better blockbuster. I think Webb made a better film.
To me, it goes back to the earlier point. Raimi took a comic book and brought it to the big screen. Webb made a movie based on a comic book. If you look at the spectrum of comic book translations you have Watchmen on one side: a filmmaker doing panel for panel shoots from a graphic novel. In the middle you have Raimi, who took the iconography and the action and was able to capture that larger than life feel the comics have without resorting to filming panels. On the other side you have Webb who took the source material and used it to create his own take on the story. I would argue that Nolan did the same thing with Batman.
I think most people prefer the middle where Raimi lived for most of his Spiderman movies. Turns out i prefer the Webb/Nolan model.
Amazing Spiderman reminds me a lot of Batman Begins. I liked Batman Begins, but i was far from in love with it. The seeds were there but it felt, at times, all over the place. I think Amazing Spiderman could end up being Batman Begins. Not the blockbuster everyone at the studio was hoping for but lays a solid foundation for the next one that could potentially be much bigger. Way too early to tell.
And the JLA movie is all kind of fucked. If for no other reason than anything they do now will seem derrivative. In the aftermath of Avengers, the movie will feel very much like a money grab. They need to find a villain that isnt Darkseid or Lex Luthor.
Edit – And i would like, at some point, to discuss Spiderman 1 & 2 in depth. They are very enjoyable, very flawed films. Im not sure why people see the second one as being vastly superior to the first. They very much feel like one long movie you could watch back to back. That’s a compliment.
But i think both movies have some real cringeworthy moments. Doc Ock as the villain in the second one had some really stupid moments. The climax is the creation of a minature sun that’s going to tear Manhattan apart…. Just odd. Much like Lizard’s plan in Amazing Spiderman is incredibly dumb.
The whole ‘destroy the city’ plot always seems stupid in Spiderman’s world. The first Spiderman makes sense. Goblin wants to make Peter choose. He has an agenda. He sees Peter and himself as evolved and wants to make Peter choose between his personal life and his role as a hero. It’s wonderfully over the top but plays well for the characters.
The second one with the minature sun… it’s so stupid. It does what it needs to do to wrap up the loose ends but its utterly idiotic in it’s conception.
Amazing Spiderman has the same flaw. Mad scientist, manhattan destroying situation with a countdown timer.
I get the world ending, massive battle stuff in Avengers. It’s totally designed for those giant, extinction level events that only superheroes banding together can defeat. But Spiderman’s stories were always better when they were smaller, personal stories of heroism.
Spidey saving the subway train in the second one is a prime example of the kind of events the he was created for. Stop a moving train, save the passengers. Not cackling scientists with goals of world domination.
So to me, the plot for the first one was far more loyal to the kind of scope a good Spiderman story has. The second one was better in terms of character but the entire villain machination was really dumb. It was also dumb in Amazing Spiderman, but again, the character moments make up for a rather ridiculous villain and end scheme.
Joe, if you really like that first horrible Spider-man movie, then go with God my son. Go with God.
martin s says:
July 3, 2012 at 8:28 pm
“JS loved them before hated them. Fickle finger of fate..
Ain’t that the truth. He was screaming emo-Amazing-Twilight since the first trailer. Now, ‘it gives us a better romance’. Sweet jesus.”
Good lord man, get off my ass. The trailers were very hit or miss for me, but the complete film is tremendous. This is why I can throw those Raimi films under the bus now, because there’s no need to care about those films anymore. They have been replaced by something better, and much much Spider-man.
Why you seemingly do not get how someone can change their mind, is why you are tied to a tired dogma. Seriously, everything is up for grabs until it’s seen. Dredd looks awesome though.
“‘Whatever the case, there is a better way to tell a Batman story…’
So, roughly two weeks from release and Nolan is still wrong. Got it.”
EIGHT YEARS, DENT ACT, but if JGL is Robin, that would be swell. There is a better way to tell a Batman story and as you have missed before as I have stated it, this involves using the entire Bat Family. Again, Kate Kane and Bruce should be the stares of the reboot.
“As for Reboot, I’ve said it before; JLA is the reboot. Spidey isn’t the template to follow anymore, Avengers is.
Drop Wayne, focus on Batman and Superman at the center. Cavill is under contract, so that’s a done deal. Have them put the League together, 3D Imax, and say hello to a Billion.
The problem for WB is if they go the Alien Invader villain route, the Avengers copycat factor is going to be insurmountable since Avengers 2 and JLA should be within a year of each other.
And it won’t be Luthor directly, the character is a played out joke.
They would be better served following Abrams Trek conceit with parallel worlds, since that’s sort of the genesis point of the DCU, what, 50 years ago.”
They need Bale to be Bats for the reboot, or the JLA movie. They also need to figure out what stinger to use next year after Supes, because that film will have to have a stinger on it. Nevertheless, Luthor is not played out, if you get the right actor for it. If they don’t use Luthor, then they have to use Darkseid. After Darkseid, then that’s where everything falls off the cliff villain-wise, and this means it will probably be Darkseid.
i recently watched the pilot for an upcoming abc sitcom called ‘the neighbors’ in which a typical urban family moves into a gated suburban community populated entirely by transplanted intergalactic aliens….what made me think of this is that the aliens all talk just like io writes…..just a thought….
and, fwiw…i would argue that sam raimi’s greatest achievement in bringing a graphic novel/comic book sensibility to the screen was (in addition to the first ‘spider-man’) ‘the quick and the dead’…say what you will about the movie itself, the visuals are terrific and so much of it looks like a panel-for-panel lift….
I’d say Raimi achieved his first pure comic book synthesis with ARMY OF DARKNESS and certainly DARKMAN was the best superhero film of the 90’s.
“If they don’t use Luthor, then they have to use Darkseid. After Darkseid, then that’s where everything falls off the cliff villain-wise, and this means it will probably be Darkseid.”
Why go for “A Villain”? Why not go the Society of Evil route, and have the heroes team up to defeat the new coordinated threat? That way you get the contrast between the interaction between the heroes/villains as opposed to the “leader telling minions what to do” of most other superhero movies.
Scoot, you are double my age so this may explain why you can follow movieman’s syntax, and not mine. You are right about “The Quick and The Dead.” A very underrated movie, that still does not get the respect it deserves. I agree with Christian about Darkman as well. It’s a tremendous movie, that I still enjoy watching.
FS, that’s what I would do. You are right, that’s what they should do. We agree, but they are going to go with Darkseid. I’d almost put money down, that’s the direction they will go. Personally, the Crime Syndicate of America from Morrison’s JLA run, is the story I’d make. If I received a 250m dollar budget from Warners.
I hope JS doesn’t treat his friends like he treats his movies. Just obsolete like that? Really? I had issues with Raimi’s Spider-Man movies, believe me, I did, but even if Amazing Spider-Man pushes every single one of my buttons (And the aesthetic of what I’ve seen from the trailers does), that doesn’t mean the good things from Raimi’s Spider-Man disappear.
Yes, the first Spider-Man movie ages worse and worse every day. I didn’t even think the special effects were good for back then (Spider-Man in action constantly looked like a man made out of rubber thrown about), the scene trying to force Macy Gray on the American public is lamer than ever (I liked a couple of her songs, but every few years, they try to force her into super stardom. I’m sorry, it’s not happening), and I wasn’t the biggest fan of Maguire (I wouldn’t call it miscasting. That’s more Maguire in The Good German). Still, it was a mostly fun movie that got the gist of Spider-Man’s internal conflict, and J.K. Simmons…. you gotta’ give it up for this guy. Perfect actor for the perfect role. You just want to forget that?
Spider-Man 2 was a really good movie I had a few issues with, but that’s the same with Burton’s Batman movies. Just because I happen to think Dark Knight was a great movie doesn’t erase what Burton was trying to do with his Batman movies. Burton took more of the Batman as an outsider in a more literal sense (Though with Keaton, he was more mildly eccentric), and Nolan took the moral, ethical, and personal conundrums of being Batman. A good quarter of Dark Knight is Bruce Wayne trying to reach for a normal life and trying to make a world that doesn’t need Batman, something I don’t think Burton would reach for, and just because I think Nolan’s Batman movies are better doesn’t make what Burton was doing invalid.
Spider-Man 3, though, yeah, throw that one away. It’s like the 80’s sequel to the popular movie that nobody likes to bring into conversations.
Why would I treat people like Raimi’s Spider-man movies, that I never really loved? When you think there’s never going to be a good Spider-man movie, you have to accept Spidey 2, and go with it. The moment there is a quality Spider-man movie, that’s free of all of Raimi’s bullshit. Yeah, those are movies are gone, and never happened as far as I am concerned.
I will disagree with you about Macy Gray. She’s still tremendous. You also act as if JK is not going to be J. Jonah in this series of films, and that’s a bit of a stretch to me. This still does not change how much of a wimp and a failure Raimi makes Spidey in his films. Hell, his Spidey could not even hold Garfield’s Spidey’s jock.
Seriously, Raimi’s Spidey is a wuss, whose barely a hero, and keeps screwing up all the time. While Garfield comes across as a real human being, faced with difficult situations, and doing the best he can to be a hero. Captain Stacy’s speech alone, is better than every single frame of Raimi’s Spidey films, and that includes the still awesome subway. Which has been replaced by C. Thomas Howell’s crane scene. If having a Spidey on screen, that comes across as he does in the comics to me means Tenzin no longer plays J. Jonah, then I can deal.
I have also explained why Burton’s Batman films are on my trash heap: he lets Bruce kill a guy. Seriously, Raimi does this with Spidey as well, and that’s even more of a reason to forget them all together.
You folks are more than free to do what you want, but as a fan of these characters from almost birth. The Batman movies start with Nolan like the Spider-man movies start with Garfield, Stone, and Webb. Nolan’s Batman films are not perfect, but they are still BATMAN in ways Burton never touched and I adore Tim Burton’s work.
Just because I have the girl I want to marry doesn’t mean I treat the girl I got along with okay, had some good times, and had one date that went disastrously but I’m still on friendly terms with like they never existed.
And maybe it’s because I treat movie adaptations like different life forms rather than evolutions of the same life form, but I don’t give nearly as much of a shit about purity of adaptation if the work’s good. Sure, there’s a nice list of favorite movies that are generally good adaptations (Fight Club, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World), but there’s also a good amount of them that are terrible adaptations (All of the Philip K. Dick adaptations I like and hell, half of Hitchcock’s work involves great movies that are terrible adaptations). In all honesty, if Fincher wants the Girl trilogy to end well, he’ll HAVE to diverge severely on the third movie. Eh, difference of philosophies.
And I don’t have anything against Macy Gray. That scene simply played like the wheels of corporate synergy grinding, and hasn’t aged well considering the general public rejected Gray as a super star. I quite like a few of her songs, especially her team ups with Fatboy Slim.
I was more offended at the creation of “world day” or whatever fake pc gathering they made up to get all the characters in the same place. Having Macy Gray there seemed oddly fitting for this stupid ass event.
And JS, your responses reek of mania. Raimis films were great until you saw Amazing and now they’ve been invalidated?
You sound like a teenage girl who rips down her Burner poster to make room for a One Direction poster.
Anghus, you are missing the point like you tend to do. I tolerated Raimi’s Spidey films, always have, and now I don’t have to anymore. Also, there are some Raimi movies that I do love, but not the man’s biggest fan. If you don’t understand that; then that’s your problem. Even Spidey 2 features so much bullshit in it, that I am glad to be rid of it.
You also need to stop with your insulting of teenage girls, Anghus. You’re in your 40s. It’s time to stop picking on teenage girls as if they are aliens worthy of scorn because they dare do things you don’t understand, or like. Oh yeah, you probably want to go with The Wanted in that insulting analogy up there, but what do I know. I dare to make a declarative statement like most of the critics about Amazing Spidey, and that makes me a teenage girl.
That’s the thing Joe: you pick what you like, and I never liked Raimi’s take on Spidey. Sure, he nailed some great scenes, but great scenes do not make for great films. You also are comparing movies to people again. They are movies, more than one reviewer has mentioned Amazing Spidey is better than any Raimi film. Please note the distinction for further reference: HUMAN… MOVIE… HUMAN… MOVIE. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING.
JS – people ride you not because you switch your mind, but because you jump over the admission of being wrong. It doesn’t freakin matter if your gut reaction was off, but you have to say it before turning into a cheerleader/defender.
TDKR – I decided to watch all the trailer consecutively the other night after I read about the 2:45 run time. Their are reveal shots that are either JGL in the suit, or of Batman’s return, either after the absence or after Wayne’s escape. I’m beginning to wonder if Catwoman knows where the lair is and takes JGL there. With an almost 3 hour runtime, they really haven’t shown much.
They also need to figure out what stinger to use next year after Supes, because that film will have to have a stinger on it.
True. Again, firings at the top level if they don’t.
Nevertheless, Luthor is not played out, if you get the right actor for it.
It’s not so much from a creative standpoint, but from marketing. Ironically, the character has become kryptonite to a Superman movie. He could work in a From Russia With Love Blofeld context.
If they don’t use Luthor, then they have to use Darkseid. After Darkseid, then that’s where everything falls off the cliff villain-wise, and this means it will probably be Darkseid.
That’s true, but Marvel is going to beat them to the punch.
It really all comes back to Super Powers in ’85. Darkseid was rebooted as the big DC villain, and Marvel followed suit five years later by turning Thanos into their Darkseid. Now, Marvel is most likely going to strike first and box WB/DC in the process.
Marvel has really screwed WB/DC in a lot of ways. By making Thor a Highlander 2 derivative, they essentially made Asgard the New Gods, and since that was Kirby’s initial idea for when he first made New Gods for DC, they don’t have a secondary avenue without New Gods becoming He-Man…which was created by DC and in development at WB.
What I’m getting at, is we’re beginning to enter the second phase of superhero context and the properties are going to turn into studio cannibals. Everything we’ve been dealing with cinematically so far, is from the real golden age of comic creation; the 1960’s. All origins and introductions. But once you move into the 1970’s, the derivatives begin to catch up because it was the same creators trading on each other or their own ideas. That’s fine for the comic industry because the costs aren’t killer, but for film projects, the stakes are too high.
This is sort of what Anghus was referring to, how everything falls onto a tonal spectrum. On one end, you have Avengers, which was pop culture perfect. On the other, you have TDK, which was cinematic. WB has had zero success with pop culture and massive luck with cinematic. So if you go Nolanesque with JLA, you’re moving into X-Men territory, but the dynamics of the two teams are not interchangeable. X-Men works because they didn’t set out to be heroes, it was forced upon them as a way to survive. JLA seeks the unity out because of the possible threats to others. So a Nolanesque JLA ends up mimicking Watchmen, which brings us back to the dangers of studio cannibalism. A Nolanesque JLA makes other DC properties like Authority, near irrelevant. It also kills Marvel properties like Squadron Supreme.
Anghus – I was more offended at the creation of “world day” or whatever fake pc gathering they made up…
Koepp watched Batman ’89 and reshuffled some scenes. The only difference between the two are the relationships of the characters. Otherwise, the story sequences are a total ripoff of Burton, even to the point where the damsel is being distressed by the villain over the side of a high-rise infrastructure. Raimi knew this which is why he wanted creative control of Spidey2.
“You’re in your 40s”
Nope. I’m not.
I do like your insane logic though. So when Man of Steel comes out next year everyone can declare “thank God, now i can stop appreciating that piece of shit Richard Donner version that i used to love”
And its only insane because you went from ‘liking’ something to ‘tolerating’ it with the kind of fickle leanings reserved for a teenager.
I have nothing against teenagers, but their tastes change at a rapid pace because theyre young and theyre figuring out what they like. That’s why i use that analogy. Not because i have contempt for teenagers, but because they are fickle.
What’s your excuse.
Anghus, it’s not insane logic, and it’s not fickleness. Countless reviewers have stated the same thing: one movie gets it more right, than three other movies do. That’s out there, and if I (or anyone) want to ignore those films? It’s my fucking prerogative.
I love James Bond, but prefer Roger Moore over Connery. Moore’s movies, I watch more, does that make me fickle, or do I have a preference? You try to figure it out because obviously as a REAL MAN, you have stayed the same way your entire life, and refuse to have a preference about anything. Why? REAL MEN CAN’T HAVE A PREFERENCE!
Personally, Superman, Superman II, and Superman Returns get Superman right for me. Hopefully, “The Man of Steel” gets the character right as well, but if he doesn’t there are always other Superman movies to watch. There’s also an amazing animated series that I own, but you are too damn manly to enjoy that aren’t you?
Whatever the case, it’s sort of insane, that you don’t understand the word “preference”, and how my “preference” does not effect you and your viewing of those movies at all. Enjoy them on Blu-ray. I will never own them, because there’s luckily a reason now to ignore their existence.
“A Nolanesque JLA makes other DC properties like Authority, near irrelevant.”
If they were feeling REALLY brave, they could do Stormwatch “Change or Die” (cliff notes: UN-sponsored international superteam defeat a well-intentioned-extremist version of Superman, but then split after discovering their leader is also a well-intentioned-extremist who just destroyed Unlimited Green Energy ™ because it would disrupt the global political status quo).
Then follow with overlapping sequels of Authority and Team Achilles covering the two ideologies of “Heroes should use their powers to proactively change the world for the better” and “Heroes should prevent powers that threaten the average citizen’s right to self-determination” respectively.
Cap the series off with Bendix returning for a final flick with both teams having to work together to defeat the common enemy.
EDIT: If that seems fairly dark, consider that at one point Tom Cruise was attached to “Sleeper” which is about a superhero who infiltrates a supervillain organization, only to face the dual problems of (a) his handler being put in a coma so no-one knows he’s undercover, and (b) he finds he identifies more with the villains than with his old teammates.
Scoot, you are double my age so this may explain why you can follow movieman’s syntax, and not mine.
Please leave me out of this discussion, JS.
I’ve deliberately avoided contributing to this thread since I’d previously shared my (positive) feelings about “Amazing” and–quite frankly–have nothing new/more to add.
Yes, it’s a terrific movie: as good as Raimi’s first “Spider” flick; not as good as his second; and definitely superior to the third.
And as pleasantly surprised as I was by Garfield’s performance (although I still can’t tell him apart from Jim Sturgess), Maguire remains my preferred Spider-Man.
I’m firmly (and, apparently, solitarily) in the camp of “If I don’t get another Batman movie in the next 20 years, that’d be just fine”. If “The Dark Knight Rises” gives the world a satisfying conclusion to the Bruce Wayne saga, then why not just leave it that way? Let the next generation resurrect the story somewhere in the future. WELL into the future.
” I will never own them, because there’s luckily a reason now to ignore their existence.”
And again, this is why i equate you to a teenage girl.
And again, i have nothing against teenage girls. i’m not as fond of them as Lex, but i have no negative feelings about them.
Js, you make assumptions based on very little factual information. You try to twist the reality to match your argument with the intensity of a Glen Beck fan. I’m not in my 40’s. I have nothing against teenage girls. You assume because i say ‘teenage girls’ are fickle that im taking a shot at teenage girls.
Nope.
Teenage girls like something one minute, then something else the next at lightning speed. And often times they jump from trend to trend and become immediately dissmissive of the thing they liked five minutes ago. I forget the marketing term, but teenage consumers are apt to love something ferociously then discard it with contempt once they find something else to latch on to.
But it’s not the logic of wise, educated people. It’s the logic (or abandonment thereof) of a group that latches onto things based on an ever changing criteria fueled my emotion and passion.
It’s not that you like Amazing Spiderman. Lots of people do. But it doesn’t require the abandonment of previous adaptations. This is the statement though that is a fascinating window into your mindset.
“because there’s luckily a reason now to ignore their existence.”
Now, there’s nothing wrong with your statement. This isnt about wrong or right. This is more about the kind of either/or, masterpiece/piece of shit mentality that permeates the current cultural mindset, and you always seem to be a perfect example of this kind of culture.
Let’s look at a few words in that sentence.
‘luckily’, as in, ‘lucklily there’s a reason to ignore their existence’.
So you said you liked Raimi’s Spiderman movies. ‘Luckily’ would imply that you begrudgingly liked them because they were Spiderman movies. As if liking them was an obligation.
As a self-professed giant comic fan, do you feel obligated to like any Spiderman film or comic film for that matter?
Based on our many conversations, i’d say ‘yes’. It explains when you talk about movies like Green lantern being a great movie. If 5 years from now someone does a Green Lantern movie i’ll be you’d like that one too and then ignore the existence of the Martin Campbell train wreck that we witnessed last year.
Another part of that sentence seems odd. The concept of ‘ignoring their existence’.
You mentioned Bond as an example, and it’s a good one. Everyone has a Bond preference. My wife loves Daniel Craig and thinks he is the hottest human being on the face of the Earth. She will tell you Quantum of Solace is better than any of the Roger Moore movies. But to her credit she will watch any Bond film. Like others, you rank them or have a personal preference. Yes, you might have a preference, but you don’t ‘ignore their existence’. i loved Casino Royale didn’t make me ignore the existence of previous Bond films.
You seem to suggest you live in some world where your mind is only capable of singling out the best adaptation of a work. That’s different than a preference. You’re not just preferring Amazing Spiderman, you are ignoring the other’s existence. That’s the scorched earth policy of a fanboy.
You’re basically saying that you love something (in this case Amazing Spiderman) so much that it invalidates any previous adaptation attempts. You have basically declared yourself “Team Webb” instead of “Team Raimi”. I use the Twilight example because, again, teenage girls tend to like one thing so much that it invalidates all other things. This is generally not the mindset of a more mature individual who is capable of making enthusiasm and passion part of the equation instead of all of it.
And you’re absolutely right. It is your ‘fucking perogative’. You can do what you wanna do. You can life your life. And there’s nothing wrong with it.
But your argument, demographically speaking, makes your habits more like a teenage girl than a male age 18-49. These thoughts are the product of mania. You’re so in love with something that you cant merely express it by saying how much you enjoyed it. You had to like it to a higher level than others. You have to like it the best. And i always find that concept weird. Think about that concept.
You like something new so much that it makes you dislike something you once claimed to enjoy.
I have a preference. I prefer The Amazing Spiderman to The Sam Raimi Spiderman movies. However, i could watch Spiderman 1 or 2 without issue and wouldnt need to ‘ignore their existence’.
I’m firmly (and, apparently, solitarily) in the camp of “If I don’t get another Batman movie in the next 20 years, that’d be just fine”
That’d be fine for me too – I’m more interested in the stories that are told rather than the character itself.
The Burton and Schumacher Batmen were fairly flat – the story was dictated by the villains coming in, and Batman himself had no character development and ended each flick pretty much exactly where he started.
Nolan, on the other hand, seems intent on exploring how much a man is willing to give to his superhero ideal. In this respect I disagree with Tarantino’s “Kill Bill” soliloquy about Superman – the Superman and Clark Kent personas are clearly different, and while he isn’t off saving the world he’s happy writing Pulitzer-winning articles and having a “normal” life. Contrast that with Batman, where the hero persona dominates every aspect of his life to the point where “Bruce Wayne” is simply a front to provide resources so he can fight crime.
Nolan explores this devotion – Begins shows Batman sacrificing his relationships, Dark Knight shows Batman sacrificing his reputation, and the exchange “You’ve given these people everything” “Not everything – not yet” hints that Rises has yet more to come.
This seems to be the logical conclusion to the story, and while I can understand WB’s desire to go back to the moneywell, there are plenty more superhero stories that can be told without having to be fronted by a batsymbol.
I haven’t seen Amazing yet – but irrespective of how well the story is told, the opinions seem to be quite heavily divided as to whether it’s saying anything different from the Raimi versions.
I agree with whoever said ‘there will always be a spiderman or batman movie in development’. i would be with gaps. all i want are good stories.
but i think it’s silly to think marvel and warner brothers wont be tapping these resources for every dime.
the only thing that will stop them is if they become unprofitable. who sees that happening anytime soon?
Actually, I’m looking forward to a Dark Knight Rises ending in which Alfred takes over the Batman job, and starts getting all Get Carter on Gotham City villains. “All right, Riddler. [TAKES BAT KNIFE OUT OF HIS UTILITY BELT] You knew what I was going to do if I caught you…”
“Actually, I’m looking forward to a Dark Knight Rises ending in which Alfred takes over the Batman job, and starts getting all Get Carter on Gotham City villains. “All right, Riddler. [TAKES BAT KNIFE OUT OF HIS UTILITY BELT] You knew what I was going to do if I caught you…”
I don’t know how much it changes continuity in the comics. I know it changes all the time. But apparently the new Batman origin is being reworked to focus on Alfred being former Special Forces.
I think i liked it more when he was just a Butler with some army history. He had seen war, faced down terrible things. But making him some kind of former super soldier seems rather…. what’s the word… oh, right… ridiculous.
I disagree with what anghus said that Webb made a better movie than Raimi. My issue with this Spiderman IS Webb and that’s a shame because of everyone here, I was pulling most for him. As I said elsewhere….who IS Marc Webb? This movie wants to be a video game, TEEN WOLF, Michael Bay and Steven Spielberg in different places. And not in a pastiche. I jjust found the whole affair kind of flat.
I also think Raimi stayed true to his idea of Peter’s struggle with Spiderman; with great power comes great responsibility. Yeah, all three films are flawed and don’t get me wrong, I’m not in love with them. But I felt like Raimi was trying to show a boy with extraordinary powers become a man. And once he gets there- he has a choice of what he can do with himself. Although the 3rd one was the worst (I felt) I thought the inclusion of Venom and Sandman and THEIR back stories were reflections of Peter/Spidey. Venom is pure eveil/killing. Sandman has a reason. Etc.
Maybe they aren’t that deep and I’m reading too much into them, but I felt Raimi had a point whereas Webb was trying to be 4 different things and yet stay true to a popcorn flick mentality. It just felt muddled and flat in the end.
JS prefers Roger Moore over Sean Connery. This explains all:)
i will agree changing the line “with great power comes great responsibility” was an epic, epic mistake.
but damn if that scene wasnt a thousand times more powerful than anything Raimi and Maguire were able to generate.
And i think that’s one of the things about Amazing Spiderman that i can concede. It makes so many things right, but it messes up some really basic stuff.
Still, liked it a lot. But i cant argue with those who said it was all over the place. There are legitimate criticisms there.
I didn’t hate it….I was just….confused and actually kind of saddened by the waste of potential.
Don, i can’t argue with that interpretation of it. Its one of those films i liked but have no issue conceding with much of the criticism levied against it.
“with great power comes great responsibility”
YES. And Raimi nailed that weight. That’s what SPIDER-MAN is about. HIs theme. Too jettison the key line of Parker’s destiny? Why?
Anghus, I can waste a hundreds of words on you, but you referring to yourself as wise and educated is hilarious. You fail in every conceivable way to make an argument, have some weird preoccupation with the ways of teenage girls, then refer to wanting to ignore something as “mania.” Yes, I ignore Lethal Weapon 4’s existence. I must be crazy. Rut-roh, I ignore the existence of Alien3 and Resurrection. See how easy it is to deal with you? If you love something and someone fucks it up, then it’s easy to ignore it. Now please, go read a book or something, because you really come across as so wise and educated, when all you can do is insult me in your replies to me. Having a discussion with a teenage girl, who loves One Direction, would be more fun.
Christian, they didn’t jettison it, they let Dennis Leary give a better speech, and I actually love Timothy Dalton the best.
Don that’s your prerogative. What you are trying to figure out with Webb, is why you probably did not like the film. He’s trying to tell a great Spider-man movie, and he did a stellar job.
No offense, movieman, but I see zero resemblance between Andrew Garfield and Jim Sturgess.
Ken Marino’s Macy Gray impression: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9Gkp2gwe6M
Well, I’m with you on Timothy Dalton.
“Anghus, I can waste a hundreds of words on you”
You always say that, but i don’t think you can. You’re terrible at discourse.
“You fail in every conceivable way to make an argument”
I respectfully disagree. I think there’s some very valid points in there.
“have some weird preoccupation with the ways of teenage girls”
Yes, i’m known for endless posts talking about teenage girls. i also have a gigantic foot fetish.
“Yes, I ignore Lethal Weapon 4′s existence. I must be crazy.”
Never said you were crazy. In fact, i spent some time saying how nothing that you’re doing is right or wrong, just different from the vast majority of people talking about the subject. There’s nothing wrong with your argument, it’s just very very different.
” If you love something and someone fucks it up, then it’s easy to ignore it.”
So now Raimi fucked it up. You went from like, to ignore, to fucking it up real fast.
“when all you can do is insult me”
Im not insulting you. Im pointing out strange and irrational logic from your posts that seems contradictory to other things youve said in the past. You think i don’t like you. Quite the contrary. I think you’re fascinating.
“Having a discussion with a teenage girl, who loves One Direction, would be more fun.”
Hard to argue that. Discussing One Direction lyrics would be fun. They sing a song that says “you don’t know you’re beautiful… and that’s what makes you beautiful.” There’s an almost Nietzsche-like quality to that… The only way to be beautiful, is by not knowing you’re beautiful. That vanity, in any form, destroys beauty….
fascinating.
How does the world’s second hottest woman look?
Is she in that labcoat the whole time, or does she wear any sexy outfits? Any feet?
lex, apparently her contract mandated miniskirts and knee high socks and/or knee high boots.
I agree with others that reboots wouldn’t be a huge deal if they didn’t insist on doing the origin story over and over and fuckin over. However in Spider-Man’s case you kind of have to do the origin story because it’s all downhill after that. He has the worst rogues gallery of any of the Holy Trinity (Superman, Batman, Spider-Man). Filmmakers pretty much don’t know what to do with the character once he’s actually Spider-Man. One fight looks like every other, just Spider-Man flippy-flopping around. The current movie pretty much highlights what I’m saying. It’s not a bad movie at all, just once you get past the fun of Parker discovering the extent of his powers it becomes a bit boring. The Lizard sucks because…he’s a fuckin giant lizard. And?
Looking at Nolan’s Batman as a template is useful only if filmmakers follow his lead: he simply grafted superheroes and villains into other film genres. The Dark Knight was basically a crime thriller. The big problem is I think The Avengers is going to be the template used moving forward, which sucks because I can virtually promise you it’s all just inching closer to the Schumacher days of when filmmakers wanted to make “living comic books.”
A few sidenotes on Spider-Man:
Garfield is GREAT. Stone is GREAT.
The movie contains the most pitch-perfect rendition of Spider-Man on screen, when he stops the car thief. In three movies with the character, Raimi never even sniffed anything as good as that sequence. It’s the only time Spider-Man is a totally cool badass, and it’s amazing that filmmakers cannot wrap their heads around a means to make a guy with his abilities look like this all the time.
SPOILER!!!!
I have no idea which villain is being foreshadowed at the end of the film. I was grateful it wasn’t the Green Goblin at least. This brings me back to my point before, Spider-Man has terrible villains. When they finally pull the trigger on the Green Goblin, it’s going to be awful. Venom would be just another CGI suckfest. A revamped Kraven might be cool but…I doubt it.
Of course I have no idea if the movie will spawn sequels. It just doesn’t *feel* like anyone gives a shit about this franchise. I guess we’ll see come Monday morning.
@Anghus
I actually thought the knee highs were a nice nod to the character in the comic book. Yeah, it looked dopey with the lab coat (albeit insanely hot) but, still. That’s pretty much what Gwen Stacey looked like.
Wait, Emma isn’t playing Kirsten Dunst, she’s playing Bryce Dallas Howard? Who knew.
To me, Gwen/Mary Jane is the same thing is Lois/Lana… I have NO IDEA what the difference is, and don’t care.
Boots are never sexy.
Amiblyman, i didn’t mind it at all. It did seem weird that she always had something pulled up to her knees, whether it be boots or socks.
Really Yancy?
It wasn’t until “The Social Network” that I even realized Sturgess and Garfield might actually be two different people, lol.
I’m still not sure whether I could tell them apart if they were standing side by side.
But as I mentioned in another thread last week, it took me years before I could differentiate between Rachel Weisz, Lena Headey, Catherine McCormack and Saffron Burrows.
They all sort of blurred together for me in the late ’90s/early ’00s.
The knee-highs are probably also an attempt to make it believable for Stone — who has played college graduates, for crying out loud — to be playing a high school student again. Garfield could use some knee socks himself, since, good as he is, he’s even more too old for his part.
Anghus, you still missing the whole, “never liked Raimi’s Spider-man trilogy” thing. Spidey 2 is still the best of a bad trio of films that much like Burton and Schmacher’s Batmans, I’d rather forget. Except Batman Forever, that one I can watch again.
movieman: I can understand a bit of Weisz/Headey confusion, but see no resemblance between either of them and McCormack, or either of them and Burrows, or between McCormack and Burrows. 🙂
Amblynman- I totally agree that the car thief scene is the best on-screen rendition of Spidey in a scene. BUT….that scene comes out of nowhere and Spidey NEVER acted like that before nor does he do it again. Thus, it feels tagged on and out of place. Just one of many issues with the tone, pacing and lack of characters development.
***** POSSIBLE SPOILER****
I also think the “mystery man” at the tag on in the credits IS Norman Osbourne and that is really, really dumb.
No, because Osborn is Spidey’s greatest enemy. Good of you to think putting him in a film, is dumb. Especially given the way Raimi completely misused him in 2002 Spidey.
@Don
Agree completely. In fact to ride your point’s coattails, the film is oddly thrown together at points. Moments just happen without much transition. I don’t know how much to blame on Webb, but it felt as though at moments the material was too much for him. The movie is kind of odd. Sometimes that works in its favor, other times it’s just awkward (the kid putting on the mask comes to mind).
Oh and as good as the car thief scene is, the one Parker-strikes-back-at-Flash scene sucks balls. The dunk is super retarded.
As someone who loved Spider-Man growing up, it kills me that filmmakers can’t seem to tap into the coolest bits of his character and powers.
Is this thing on? Yeah, hello, loved Spidey for decades and like many, feel he finally got his due on screen. You and Don’s complaints are completely mystifying given how this film distinguishes itself compared to what came before, and exceeds it by leaps and bounds. You may have not gotten the Spidey you wanted, but a lot of us did. Please feel free to ignore the reviews, Newsorama, and so on as if we are all a bunch of crazy people.
But the reviews were better for the first two Raimis.
@JS
I apologize that I didn’t like the film as much as you and others have. (Ad an aside, using “SO many people liked the movie too!” as proof of a film’s quality is just lame. Who fuckin cares? I bet when you argue politics you compare people to Hitler.). Also, I don’t concede any special ownership of the character to you. The movie is much better than Raimi’s films, but it’s also deeply flawed. The car thief scene is a frustrating reminder of what could have been. The Lizard is awful, All the fights between Spidey and The Lizard are awful, the dumb promise Leary has Parker pinky-swear to is note-for-note Maguire walking away from Dunst at the funeral. Sally Field’s Aunt May adds nothing. At least Flash Thompson didn’t look Italian in this one.
Look, it’s a good movie. It’s a better Spider-man than we’ve gotten. Huzzah. Just not quite there yet.
On your Norman Osborn point, sure. He’s Spidey’s greatest villain. And it just so happens that Spidey’s greatest villain is a shitty Joker ripoff that will look like exactly that if they try it again. Oh wait – maybe they’ll do the shitty Lex Luthor rip off version instead.
“that scene comes out of nowhere and Spidey NEVER acted like that before nor does he do it again”
Exactly. One of many problems. I’m surprised by so many giving this thing a pass. It’s pretty bad.
Raimi 1 and 2 (flaws and all) were transportive cinema.
Webb 1 misses the mark across the board.
Same beats as Rami 1 only half baked.
And a nonsensical plot.
Plodding is being kind.
Miscast all over the place. Never have I seen so many good actors at sea.
Sigh. Standards have been lowered again.
Makes Avengers look like a masterpiece.
Hopefully TDKR will be awesome.
Anghus: I vaguely remember reading somewhere that it actually was Michael Caine’s idea that Alfred be a former Special Force op. If so, maybe the people doing the comics decided to grab the idea and run with it. That wouldn’t be the first time the comics were influenced by outside forces. As I recall, they actually killed off Alfred back in the ’60s in the comics — but changed their minds when the character was introduced in the TV show.
“He has the worst rogues gallery of any of the Holy Trinity”
Mysterio, who uses special effects to fight Spidey, would probably be the most meta villain ever.
I hope this doesn’t come across as a backhanded compliment. First off, even though JS & I have always been cool, I still gotta give him props for remaining cool and maintaining a sense of humor throughout this thread. Don’t know if he’s changed anybody’s mind but if this was a year or so ago, I don’t think there would’ve been this much volleying back and forth on opinion w/out David having to come in and start issuing technicals.
As far as what I think the best thing that’s come out of the Spidey films would be the visualization of self doubt as portrayed in Spidey II. I know the webshooting glans really pissed a lot of fans off but for that insight into character, which hasn’t be able to be portrayed w/out some lengthy speech in the past, I felt would have more than made up for the liberty taken.
I did think Webb knew the caliber of talent he had and relied on them to convey almost all of the emotion as opposed to the first two Spideys that had talented casts but put a greater emphasis on Peter Parker defining his sense of character and moral obligation in the story itself. To put it another way, in Raimi’s first and certainly second, Peter’s had a paradigm shift in his viewing of right and wrong, questioning what it even matters that I felt was more broadly played out. **POTENTIAL SPOILERS** In Webb’s, what do you have? Oh great, he finally remembers to stop off at the store. Great, next week he can pick up the dry cleaning. ????? And because the cast in Webb’s Spidey was so strong, here you have portrayed such honest, hard working, loving people, who don’t seem at all demanding or at odds w/Peter like a typical guardian/adolescent relationship so then when papa dies after nearly 40 years of marriage, you see the anguish in Sally’s face, and Peter’s running off like he’s got piano lessons or a paper route. Wahhh?? Do you think he could’ve stayed around long enough to feed her a few kleenex while waiting for the TV dinner he’s popped in the microwave for her to finish before going to play Beeker? I realize it’s a project that’d alter human history but even NASA found time to play catch w/the chimps before they shot ’em into space. **END SPOILERS**
I don’t know if there’s anything I really want to see now out of Spidey. I liked the first one when it came out, although I just thought it was an entertaining film. I had heard some reviews were glowing for Spidey II but I really figured bigger/faster kind of thing. I had no idea Raimi & the writers would find a way to take it to another level. I’d really like to be surprised again but this one didn’t give me a sense of something greater will now come now that the foundation was laid. Thematically, if Webb tries to recreate Spidey II it’s going to be even greater drudgery for those of us who found this effort to be a little long on Xerox. I like Garfield though, I ain’t gonna lie. I just wasn’t sure who exactly he was supposed to be. He didn’t have to be huge geek to BMOC but I didn’t get the sense that he was transformed by the powers or even that they amplified who he was as a person as much as I would’ve hoped or expected.
Amblynman says:
July 4, 2012 at 7:33 pm
@JS
“I apologize that I didn’t like the film as much as you and others have.”
Yeah the point of that is you completely ignoring in the same thread, that someone liked the movie. I found that funny, and wanted to point it out.
“(And an aside, using ‘SO many people liked the movie too!’ as proof of a film’s quality is just lame. Who fuckin cares? I bet when you argue politics you compare people to Hitler.)”
Who fucking cares if you hate the movie for bullshit reasons? Oh that’s right: it’s called being respectful of someone else’s opinion, and I once again sited them as a rebuttal to you and Don discussing the film as if it exist in a vacuum. You also bringing up Hitler, makes you a GOTI, and your argumentative style is sorely lacking.
“Also, I don’t concede any special ownership of the character to you. The movie is much better than Raimi’s films, but it’s also deeply flawed. The car thief scene is a frustrating reminder of what could have been.”
The car thief scene is another example of what Spidey does in the comics week after week after week. Pick one up, read it, and I recommend “Avenging Spider-man.”
“The Lizard is awful,”
Nope.
“All the fights between Spidey and The Lizard are awful,”
Actually having a villain that’s CGI fight a practical Spider-man, is why this film is better than Raimi’s.
“the dumb promise Leary has Parker pinky-swear to is note-for-note Maguire walking away from Dunst at the funeral. Sally Field’s Aunt May adds nothing. At least Flash Thompson didn’t look Italian in this one.”
Sorry, I stopped giving a shit about what you wrote the moment you insulted Italians. Nice prejudice there, jerkass.
“Look, it’s a good movie. It’s a better Spider-man than we’ve gotten. Huzzah. Just not quite there yet.”
Are you going to insult Italians again, because I stopped caring at this point.
Triple, your entire opinion is based around holding onto those previous Raimi movies, and that’s fine. They just aren’t as good as this movie, and when you praise them like you do. It comes across a little dated, but do what you want to do. Comparing Raimi’s films that never got the character right, to a film that does is sort of confusing. To each their own.
I’ve been reading all this and a sense of deja vu is coming over me….oh well…here goes.
“Actually having a villain that’s CGI fight a practical Spider-man, is why this film is better than Raimi’s.”
What does this even mean? So if Raimi had a CGI villian that would have made his versions better. Oh wait, I forget, Sandman was all practical.
Also, by that standard, you must have hated Avengers with it’s non CGI Loki.
It’s not enough to prefer Webb’s version, everything before it has to be a piece of shit. It’s not enough to love The Avengers, it has to be that it rescued comic book movies from Nolan’s hellish vision. It’s not enough to love Whedon, it has to be that Favreau never got it right in the first place.
Scorched earth man…just scorched earth.
On a side note, could somebody please give Benicio Del Toro an Academy Award. He fucking ruled in Savages.
Bulldog, you got so much wrong in your post, that you need to borrow that book after Anghus. You also do not get, that I am fine with my stance about Amazing Spidey, and scorched earth means ignoring people giving me shit for having an opinion. Go over to the http://www.spoonyexperiment.com, watch Noah and Miles’ review, and maybe you will understand why some of us really did not like Raimi’s Spider-man trilogy. Until then, who cares what you think about Spider-man. I don’t.
Go buy those BDs of that previous trilogy, get shit-faced while watching them, and have a good ol’time. Unlike you, I am not a judgmental dick, so I am not going to give you shit for liking those movies.
Does the new Spider-Man steal its ending from The Phantom Menace as well? I mean, that is the gold standard, right JS? An adaptation that relies on the storytelling genius of Lucas’ worst.
“Oh that’s right: it’s called being respectful of someone else’s opinion, ”
Says the guy who attacks any opinion that is not his…
No, it’s not attacking, just explaining that your opinion is wrong!
Wow, it’s two people spouting the same bullshit about me, that has nothing to do with me. I could give a shit about your opinions, so why would I need to be more right than you, or prove you wrong? In what world do you think I would value your opinions that much? It’s a blog, only 20 of us post on it, and most of the time we are civil. This does not mean I am looking for your approval. I stated my opinion, and got shit for it. That’s ridiculous.
That aside, Man, that makes no sense. Thank you for sharing that amazing insight about The Phantom Menace. Seriously, we are all enthralled by it.
Team IO on this one; ASM is terrific, and easily as good as the first two Raimis– which are perfectly good, and Maguire is a great Peter Parker, but this one’s on a slightly different level.
Joe – Webb actually hired Caine to play Aunt May in ASM… but they couldn’t find the wig from Dressed to Kill, so he was fired.
TRUE STORY!!!
All they needed was a breakout sort of role that made me sit up and take notice, Yancy:
With Weisz it happened in “Constant Gardener;” w/ Burrows it was “Miss Julie;” Headey, “300.”
Never had that revelatory moment w/ McCormack, alas. (Is she still acting?)
Working up a theory that “movieman” is the least observant human being ever. Isn’t this the guy who finds some resemblance between sausage-face pug-nose Matt Damon and easy-amblin’ ’70s dude Jeff Bridges?
How did you not notice WEISZ until *2005*’s Constant Gardener? Like, Stealing Beauty, Chain Reaction, two Mummy movies, SHAPE OF THINGS, that thing with the John BARRY score and Vincent Perez from like ’98?
Nothing? NOTHING? 🙂
I noticed their “presence,” but they left minimal impression on me, Lex.
All those svelte, dark-haired British beauties just sort of…blended together into one.
And when I made the Damon/Bridges comparison, it was more re: their no-bullshit acting styles (you don’t seem them sweat the way you do with some tortured Method thespians) and adventurous spirit (consistently working with interesting auteur directors, b.o. be damned) more than any physical similarities. Although a case could be made that they both started their careers as “All-American Boy-Next-Door” types.
HUGE Burrows, Weisz and Headey fan back then. Saffron in particular is pretty close to my ultimate woman.
Not so much post 2006. Youth is wasted on the young. Headey in GOSSIP is PURE atomic hotness… on Game of Thrones she’s too botox’d for the period setting.
We don’t see nearly enough of Burrows these days.
I really thought her breakthrough perf was in Mike Figgis’ criminally underrated “Miss Julie.”
Maybe if the film had been a commercial (or critical) success she would have gotten the kind of traction Weisz (deservedly) received from “Constant Gardener.”
Is Burrows still partnered w/ Figgis? He sort of fell off the map, too, didn’t he?
Lexg, you mean you actually like this new Spiderman while STILL liking the first two Raimis? You mean that’s actually possible? You mean you didn’t say ‘fuck Raimi and his bullshit, I’m team Webb now,’ and spit on the sidewalk? You mean there is a remote possibility that even if you like Webb’s version more, which is perfectly fine, you’re not hosting a BBQ and Blue Ray burning party for every copy of Raimi’s spiderman that exist in your town?
Saffron Burrows actually had a nice run as Jeff Goldblum’s partner for a season of Law & Order: Criminal Intent.
BTW: Here’s a link to one of many pieces in which Michael Caine talks about inventing a back story for Alfred.
http://screenrant.com/michael-caine-dark-knight-rises-alfred-backstory-rothc-120090/
IO/JS-
I know Norman Osbourne is Spidey’s biggest enemy. However I didn’t know he had the magical power to transport himself into rooms and then disappear. You didn’t either because IT’S NOT TRUE. But I’m sure you’ll overlook that part of the scene in your histrionic martyrdom.
Don/Petaluman: what are you going on about? If it’s not Osborn, then it could be Electro. One believes it’s Osborn, because he had a similar hairline as the Osborn hologram. You know the hologram? Did you catch it, or did you miss it in your confusion? The funniest thing is a horror film fan completely missing the monster movie moment between the Lizard and Gwen, and the reason why it’s scored the way that it is. I am sure you will overlook this, because this film confused you. An action movie confused you.
68, there are many of us who are happy to have a reason to completely ignore, that trilogy’s existence. This posters on this blog and their inability to grasp such a simply point, highlights even more what Lex said on twitter last night. It’s like you can’t fathom, that someone ignores something they don’t like; for something they like. What’s even funnier is that you think you have the RIGHT TO GIVE ME SHIT FOR IT, AND YOU DON’T.
McCormack was a regular on last year’s excellent FX series LIGHTS OUT. She played Holt Macallany’s wife. She was good, but her come-and-go accent was a bit distracting (though I think they did try to explain it at some point).
That was McCormack on “Lights Out”??
For some reason I was thinking it was Headey.
But Headey was (is) on “Games of Throne.”
You’re right about her accent on “LO,” tho: it was annoying as f**k.)
Another pair of actresses I mix up from time to time: Frances O’Connor and Embeth Davidtz.
Just skimming this thread and sort of amused by all the spoiler warnings for Spider-man. What could possibly happen in this movie that would be at all surprising? Peter gives up crime-fighting to open a strip club in Tampa? Gwen Stacy starts cooking meth to pay her student loans?
Spoiler: The villain is vanquished and the path is paved for a sequel. There. And I haven’t even seen it.
Rob! Dude! More warning!
F it; I’m going to Savages.
Another ASM Spoiler: Turns out his full name is actually Peter Jessica Parker.
Cadavra: I think David Letterman beat you to that one.
You know what didn’t even hit me until right now?
No Harry Osborne in ASM.
I was going rewrite a pretty involved response to JS but then realized he didn’t actually say anything other than “but I REALLY LIKED THE MOVIE!”.
And I’m perfectly content with that.
Anyone else read the non-review review of TDKR in LAT?
One line makes me wonder if they are doing a variation on Batman Beyond.
Escalation has been the theme from Begins, so maybe Wayne realizes he’s the one who brought this on Gotham from the start.
So Wayne “sacrifices” Wayne, since Bane knows he’s Batman, and becomes JGL’s mentor, and/or leaves Gotham at the end, maybe with Kyle. It would be a callback to the opening of Begins.
Amblynman– you’re new around here so I’ll let you know….don’t bother. It’s like writing a response to the air.
Joe: Wow, great minds think alike! 😉
Don, you’re the fucking jerk who attacked me worse than I or anyone else has ever attacked anyone here, for liking “Paul.” Seriously, if I am such a waste of time, that makes me better than you: the jackass who threw a shit fit over “Paul”, then completely backed away once Poland stated he liked it.
Although I refuse to address IO when he’s hulking out, I’ll allow his ilk to do it in this links. They show that ASM was apparently sliced and diced last minute which left many dangling plot threads. Threads that were IN the trailers then cut to apparently make it a shittier movie. Threads anyone who isn’t in lust with the film can admit to.
http://badassdigest.com/2012/07/05/was-the-untold-story-cut-from-the-amazing-spider-man/
JS
Please stop insulting people for having their own tastes. It’s really annoying and just makes me dismiss you even more. You take personal info that people put on here and use it against them (like their ages)…people should be able to talk about their lives without worrying about someone like you (or..actually, you), trashing them or their opinions with it.
Glamour, dismiss me? Why do you guys act as if I should care about that? Why do you declare it? The funny think is: I have been given shit for my opinions, my taste, but giving me shit for opinions is okay? Even when I am not attacking anyone and their love of Raimi’s films? Did you see me attack Christian? Nope, so your point? Your point about personal info? How did guessing at someone’s age insult them? Did you miss me getting insulted? Seems like you did, and that’s another silly ass part of this blog.
Petaluma, you were probably still reeling from Amazing Spidey confusing you into a stupor, to notice I already pointed this out. Unlike you, the film did not confuse me, and I could piece together they changed things. A lot of that is the synopsis about Pete’s genetics Devin listed in that article, but given how this movie plays. It makes sense to hold onto that information for the sequels that are coming in two and four years.
I don’t mind reboots or sequels per se. There are many ways to tell different stories based on the same property, particularly when you have 100 million+ to do it. What I find annoying is doing rebooted origin stories. What percentage of all comic book movies are origin stories? 85%? That angle is utterly exhausted and completely trite.
The absolute worst was the G.I. Joe movie-perhaps not a true comic book property I know-when we got a lame origin story for Snake Eyes. Snake Eyes has no origin story!!! That’s the whole point!
On the same topic, the more I think about it the more baffled I am that George Lucas has apparently forbidden any future Star Wars movies. I’m not asking Lucas to do any more himself, but what if some slick film maker pitches him on a star wars universe movie? Isn’t that a practically guaranteed moneymaker? All Lucas has to do is say yes and then check his canon book or whatever. Why say no to more movies in that universe? They’ve got a million novels and what not with all kinds of jedi and sith kicking around. Choose a good story and make a movie. Isn’t this a slam dunk?
This thread is an Autism Support Group without the support.
The absolute worst was the G.I. Joe movie-perhaps not a true comic book property
It actually is. All of the characters were created by Marvel, (Larry Hama, IIRC), for the toyline. So Hasbro brought it to Marvel first, then released the toys, then the comic.
Transformers and He-Man fall onto the same crossroad: Toy lines developed first by comic companies, then released as toys.
Saw Amazing Spiderman last night and really enjoyed it – it’s arguably a bit better than Spiderman 2, which I really liked. The casting is spot on, the performances are pretty strong, and one unreported point of praise are the effects….this Spiderman seems to have real weight as he swoops around and that was always an issue with the Raimi movies.
And I do think it’s funny now many folks are now shitting all over Tobey Maquire….the Spiderman movies really hurt his reputation but do people forget how damn good this guy was in Wonder Boys, Pleasantville, The Ice Storm??? He brought to Spiderman EXACTLY what the writers and directors called for….that said, Garfield is fantastic! He comes off much more naturally as an impulsive teenager who has a new toy and is lovestruck.
My biggest issue with the movie is the structure of the story and how all of the characters are related….I mean, come on….
SPOILER ALERT
It’s not enough that Peter Parker’s father worked at Oscorp, that his partner was Curt Conners, and that Gwen Stacy’s father happens to be the police commissioner but…..she ALSO happens to be the head intern for Curt Conners as well??? These folks live in New York City, not Smallville! It’s a bit much and did take me out of the story – all Parker has to do is call Gwen and she has the access to get to Conners’ office and craft an antitode. She’s a freakin teenager, he doesn’t have any real assistants??
One other thing I will say…Sally Field’s underplaying is a HUGE improvement over the scenery chewer who played Aunt May in the last trilogy. Sorry, but that “Some say a herooooo….” monologue from Spidey 2 still makes me laugh out loud even though I enjoy the hell out of the movie.
Wow Disco, I hope Jenny McCarthy comes over to your house, and hits you with an umbrella.
Martin, I don’t think it happened that way. Hasbro came up with the character types, then Hama gave them a back a backstory via the file cards. This is the Real American Hero line, and not the GI Joe line in existence since the 60s.
Transformers also existed as a Takara toyline a year or two before arriving in the US. The characters had their names, but they worked with Marvel on the G1 animated series.
ETA: Geoff, that world is a bit interconnected, but it’s at least for a good reason. The reason being: Oscorp being the central hub of all the insanity in that universe.
@ Geoff I still haven’t seen the Spidey movie, and maybe I’m alone in this, but as a longtime hater, I always found Maguire’s usually perpetual happy-go-lucky boyish acting style aggravating and thought it rang false. Maybe that’s why I liked “Brothers,” because it was such a change of pace and allowed him to let himself go. I will admit to liking “Pleasantville,” but hate “Cider House” and don’t think he brought a whole lot to “Ice Storm.” I suspect a lot of people have secretly hated on Maguire for years and this is their opportunity to unload on him.
That said, I am actually looking forward to his performance in “The Details,” playing a sexual deviant/porn addict.
Poor Tobey.
http://jpegy.com/geeky/spider-man-im-amazing-8259
I admired Tobey Maguire’s work in Ride With the Devil, a movie I don’t think has ever gotten its due.
“Although I refuse to address IO when he’s hulking out, I’ll allow his ilk to do it in this links. They show that ASM was apparently sliced and diced last minute which left many dangling plot threads. Threads that were IN the trailers then cut to apparently make it a shittier movie. Threads anyone who isn’t in lust with the film can admit to.”
i loved Amazing Spiderman. And i have no problem admitting that they probably made some deep, deep cuts to streamline the final product. There is obviously a bucket full of deleted footage somewhere with Conners’ connection to his parents. That one line alone:
“If you want to know your parents secret, come and get it”
But thats not something that’s make or break for me. I can only judge the film i watched, not the potential for what i might or might not have been.
The Avengers has 30 minutes of cut scenes. And there’s a lot of things totally unexplained. Does it make it any better or worse of a movie? I wont know until i see a directors cut.
I dont know if you can call cutting scenes out of ASM and leaving it more ambiguous ‘dangling’, especially knowing that there are more chapters planned.
Would you call the end of Spiderman 2 a ‘dangling’ plot thread when Harry shatters the mirror and finds his father’s stash of Green Goblin weapons? They eluded to something more happening but it wasnt addressed until film number 3.
I can agree with you it’s shitty for a marketing standpoint since they basically marketed the films as THE UNTOLD ORIGIN and what we got was Origin 2.0. What was untold about his origin other than the fact that his parents worked for Oscorp. I know some people feel it was very misleading in that respect. Can’t argue that.
But, i can argue that if dangling plot threads based off promotional material for the film is the reason for disliking ASM, then i think you’re judging the movie based on things you didn’t see from title sequence to the closing credits. And that’s all i can really judge any movie on.
Joe, i have a marginally amusing Ride With the Devil story. A friend of mine worked on the film. He said the set was interesting because Ang Lee’s direction was kind of odd, and a lot of the actors didnt quite know what to do.
He talked about this one scene where he kept filming take after take. And after awhile of not getting what he wants, he walks up to the actor and goes:
“You need to be…… AHHHHHHHHHHHHH”, yelling really loudly. Then he pats the guy on the shoulder and
walks back behind the camera and they roll.
And apparently the scene was not a loud scene, or an angry one. and everyone was trying to figure out what exactly he meant by that. They also mentioned a similar note he’d give “You need to be….” followed by a gutteral grunting sound.
Tobey is a solid actor with the exception being his time as Spider-man. People go on and on about Keaton being miscast as Batman, but he sort of works in that role. Tobey is so miscast as a superhero, that it’s rather trippy he starred as one in three films.
ETA: Very good points above, and I will add it sort of makes sense to hold off those reveals til later. Pete’s parents are probably still alive in these films, there is the secret of Pete’s genetic make-up, and it all goes back to Oscorp. Even with this film cutting out big plot threads. It still establishes a more interesting and personal direction for sequels, then the previous trilogy.
That aside, the Avengers Director’s Cut is supposed to feature more Steve, and his adventures in the 21st century in case you didn’t know.
I heard something awhile ago about they releasing the AVENGERS director’s cut into theatres…I guess this isn’t happening? I figured they could get another $40 million out of it and pass TITANIC…
Anghus: Weirdly enough, by sheer coincidence of scheduling, I saw Ride With the Devil and Cider House Rules back to the back at the Toronto Film Festival years ago — and found myself very impressed by Maguire’s range. The only other similar experience I’ve ever had: Seeing a double bill of Alfie and Hurry Sundown back in the 1960s. Hadn’t seen either film before. And trust me: After two hours of hearing Michael Caine doing thick cockney, it was genuinely shocking to hear him do a (not half bad) Southern accent in the Preminger film.
Funny you should mention that TIFF double-header, Joe.
I saw both Tpbey Maguire movies back to back in Toronto as well. (I’m pretty sure that it was a Friday afternoon.)
Glad to see that a few of you are sticking up for Maguire.
I really don’t get all the haters.
He’s always been an immensely likable screen presence, and a gifted young actor.
i don’t hate Maguire at all. I think he’s done some good work.
I think Andrew Garfield is eight thousand times better, and not just based on ASM. That kid is fucking ridiculously talented.
RIDE WITH THE DEVIL is seriously, SERIOUSLY great.
I would highly recommend everyone giving it a 2nd chance. For some reason, I didn’t think much of it in 1999, but saw that Criterion disc of it a year or so back, and was blown away, thought it was an Altman-level work of art, and probably Ang’s second or third best movie.
Also Maguire rules.
LexG: http://www.movingpictureshow.com/archives/mpsRideDevil.htm