|
Until I looked it up now I missed that the arms had an AI feedback into him. I thought the inhibitor chip was to limit the commands sent to the arms to only conscious stuff so it was his subconscious and ego and all those subsurface dark thoughts steering them that he quickly embraced.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
Karloff posted:I think the dark mirror stuff is very much present. The way I always read is that Doc Ock hosed up and got someone he loved (his wife) killed, just like Peter hosed up and got someone he loved (Uncle Ben) killed. The difference is that Peter accepted responsibility for it and became a hero. Ock refuses to take responsibility and becomes a monster. He insists that he couldn't have miscalculated and the tentacles (representing his ego) push him forward, and so the desire to do his experiment again and make it work is to prove that his wife's death was not his fault. Not only that, but the movie is all about how hard it is for Peter to balance being Spider-man and having a normal life, and then he gets to sit down with Octavius who appears to have it all, nice life, loving wife, gets to do awesome science stuff and makes it seem effortless. Like he's an older version of Peter who managed to finally sort out all of his daily life struggle nonsense. So yea, I think the dark mirror stuff comes across perfectly well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:30
|
|
|
The funny part is that I remember the PlayStation 2 Spider-Man 2 game doing Doctor Octopus better, fleshing him out more by adding a subplot where he was also obsessed with punishing Spider-Man because he blamed his interference for causing the accident. I don't remember that making it into the actual film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
The arms seem menacing at first but until the accident there's no hint that they have some kind of ulterior motive or evil intent. Like someone already said, the arms are Octavius. They are created and programmed by him and represent his dark side and his ambition. It's telling that the thing that keeps the "arms" from being in control is called the inhibitor chip. The accident literally removes Octavius' inhibitions. The arms do murder all the surgeons but they were threatened and because we know that the arms' camera eyes and controls are wired into Octavius it's impossible to view them as truly separate at any point after he first hooks himself in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
It’s not just that they didn’t do the dark mirror thing in the way I wanted; I also compared it to the fact that it’s too similar to Norman’s whole Gollum Staring Into The Pond bit. The subconscious influencing his tentacles is one thing, yeah, so it’s himself pushing him into a being bad guy... but they already DID that. Second verse, same as the first. Two movies in a row with Jekyll being pushed to do bad things by Hyde.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:49
|
|
|
Norman was kind of a dick though. And he actively chose to use the serum knowing the consequences and did so in reaction to getting kicked out of his own company (I think, it's been a while since I've seen Spider-Man 1). The serum empowered the character's asshatery that was already presented in the film. Otto was a victim of circumstance by comparison, who was super charming and charismatic prior to the accident.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
bessantj posted:Just saw The Lego Batman Movie for the first time. That's a fun movie! Phenomenal movie and it never seemed to generate as much buzz and conversation as other superhero movies. I can't figure out why.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
teagone posted:Norman was kind of a dick though. And he actively chose to use the serum knowing the consequences and did so in reaction to getting kicked out of his own company (I think, it's been a while since I've seen Spider-Man 1). The serum empowered the character's asshatery that was already presented in the film. Otto was a victim of circumstance by comparison, who was super charming and charismatic prior to the accident. Yea, Norman was a corporate CEO dickhead obsessed with earning military industrial complex funding, Octavius was a scientist working on free energy for all mankind, I don't think you can compare the two.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
It's a fair point that they seemed similar but I suppose they wanted to do something more than "whoops explosion brain damage" which is Dr. Octopus' origin in the comics. But it's also a thing that just pops up in Spider-Man's villains. Both Norman and Harry with their Goblin personas, Brock with the symbiote pushing him, Connors always on the edge of turning into the Lizard, Morbius fighting against his bloodlust, Li and his Mr. Negative dark side, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
Lobok posted:The greatest action beat in Spider-Man 2 is him catching Aunt May. The entire bank/side of the building fight culminates in that moment with the tension ratcheting up the whole way including the fake-out of her falling the first time and the way he webs himself down towards the street and to her was perfectly animated and shot. Plus the score during that scene is fantastic with Spider-Man's theme only poking through Ock's theme here and there until finally and triumphantly soaring in that moment. I love the exchange afterward when Aunt May finally realises Spiderman is a hero ''Have I been wrong about you!'' ''We sure showed him'' ''What do you mean we?'' ''... oh'' I loving love Spiderman 2 and a lot of it is because of the goofy Raimi touches like the over the top extras and the Doc Ock hospital scene straight out of The Evil Dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
Jake the hillbilly from ED 2 was at the front of train.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:When he referenced Moore, I could tell he never read Tom Strong. I just want to say one more thing about this. I had previously thought that Moore had wrote Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow after he wrote Watchmen, but I was wrong. The two comics we're published the very same year. Which I think says Moore. Okay I'm done now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:48
|
|
|
The alternate personality stuff for the goblins isn’t really a classic part of their origins. And brain damage was something added to Dr. Octopus’s origin and later retconned further into his brain being mutated to control his tentacles without directly connecting them to his body. And come on, people. I’m not saying that Norman and Otto are literally the same character in the movies. I’m saying they reuse a plot device that ultimately cheapens them as villains for me. It’s less about them becoming what they are because of their failings as people and more about what science voodoo does to mess with their heads. The fact their subconscious is involved kind doesn’t make it much better because without the inhibitor chip’s damage or the goblin formula they wouldn’t be doing this poo poo or going this far. Their comic characters suffered accidents but are what they are because they chose to let the difficult experiences of their life drove them to commit evil; the fantastic events happening to them were a nudge off a ledge while in the Raimi moves it’s a great big push. That makes them better foils for Peter than something messing with their heads. Because Peter’s backstory is about CHOICE, and Norman and Otto’s ability to make choices are impaired where his were not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:49
|
|
|
The Spider-Man PS4 game does Dr Ock very well
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
In spite of their issues, I still enjoy Webb's Amazing movies more than Raimi's, which I also like except for SM3. SM3 is just god awful. Really psyched to take my son to see Shazam. I'm old enough to remember watching the 70's TV show and always dug the character.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Nodosaur posted:The alternate personality stuff for the goblins isn’t really a classic part of their origins. And brain damage was something added to Dr. Octopus’s origin and later retconned further into his brain being mutated to control his tentacles without directly connecting them to his body. Dr. Octopus was straight-up brain damaged from the beginning. The narration box in that first issue says as much. What they added later was all the twisted family backstory and terrible upbringing. And at least after it was revealed that Osborn (I keep mistyping and my phone wants to correct to LeBron) was the Goblin there was an alternate personality aspect to him, depending on how intact his memory was. Maybe not a true split personality clinically but he would go in and out. The movie has that shot of him in the elevator that's basically a Romita/Kane panel, complete with flop sweat. Except in the movie he's not going into a Goblin frenzy but coming down from it, from the burning building fight just before.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 23:30
|
|
|
Everything I dislike about SM3 is eclipsed by how garbage the Garfield movies were. I hate them. I hate them more than anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
David D. Davidson posted:I just want to say one more thing about this. I had previously thought that Moore had wrote Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow after he wrote Watchmen, but I was wrong. The two comics we're published the very same year. Which I think says Moore. Moore's Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow was meant to be the "last" Superman story, before they rebooted him with John Byrne's The Man of Steel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:16
|
|
|
I still haven’t seen the Amazing movies as much as I love Spider-Man. Something just smelled off from the start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:18
|
|
|
Lobok posted:Dr. Octopus was straight-up brain damaged from the beginning. The narration box in that first issue says as much. What they added later was all the twisted family backstory and terrible upbringing. I apologize for being mistaken then, a lot of the stuff on wikis is hard to parse. But the fact they retconned the brain damage part goes to show they didn’t need to create an alternative with the inhibitor chip business, which is effectively not much better, either way. They could have easily just made him a bad person; as for Norman, I’d argue the character is more compelling when he has control of his faculties and there’s no difference between him and the Goblin, given it’s defined his portrayal for the last several decades.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:36
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Everything I dislike about SM3 is eclipsed by how garbage the Garfield movies were. I hate them. I hate them more than anything. That seems to be the popular opinion and I know I'm in the minority but I've watched ASM 1 & 2 and the Raimi trilogy multiple times and I still prefer ASM. I can see why some people disagree but don't see it as a landslide in favor of Sam and Toby either. For one thing, I think the on screen chemistry and the way they wrote the romance was way better in the Webb films. Also nothing tops the ASM2 costume.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:46
|
|
|
ASM1 was really solid. ASM2 was a good but not great film until the last fifteen minutes are so when they killed Gwen Stacy for no goddamn reason. I think that's when I conclusively came down against adhering to comic canon. Garfield and Stone had GREAT chemistry, and Spider-Man in London like they teased would have worked! Hell, they're doing European Spider-Man in Far From Home.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
I WILL DEFEND THE FIRST ASM FILM WITH THE FURY OF A THOUSAND SNYDER APOLOGISTS Skateboarder Peter is awesome and he and Emma Stone are hundreds of times more enjoyable than Maguire and Dunst and ALSO
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:59
|
|
|
Little creepy that they were hanging around high schoolers though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:00
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Sure say what you want about his TV lighting and his TV style directing, obviously the man came from television and that's what he's best at. But I don't think any other writer could have handled that material as well, and the backlash to Whedon is mostly just people reacting to a trend of quippiness that kept going after him and was done worse and worse with every person who followed (except James Gunn, the Guardians movies are probably the most creative in the whole MCU).
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
The ASM films have individual things I think work well but none of them come together and I genuinely think Peter is an unlikable prick. Which is fine, you can do an unlikable prick Peter, but the film never really seemed to agree with me. The death of Gwen Stacy really soured me on the whole thing though. It was peak "we're doing this because the comics did it" but was tremendously unsatisfying and served to cut out one of the high points of the series in order to be Loyal To Comic Books. Even if she'd come back as a clone or whatever it was just eeeh. The Death of Gwen Stacy was meaningful in large part due to the time and context it was created. These days repeating it just feels like Killing A Girlfriend So The Guy Is Sad, regardless of how accurate-to-canon it is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:02
|
|
|
Nodosaur posted:I apologize for being mistaken then, a lot of the stuff on wikis is hard to parse. But the fact they retconned the brain damage part goes to show they didn’t need to create an alternative with the inhibitor chip business, which is effectively not much better, either way. They could have easily just made him a bad person; as for Norman, I’d argue the character is more compelling when he has control of his faculties and there’s no difference between him and the Goblin, given it’s defined his portrayal for the last several decades. I think Norman has to be out of control every now and then. The main complaint about his characterization since returning from the dead is that he's too Luthor-like and so many of his best moments since are when he becomes unhinged. If you ever get the chance to check out Warren Ellis' run on Thunderbolts he does such a good job of showing Osborn slowly losing control. To your point, he and the Goblin have been one and the same for a long time but he's not quite the Hobgoblin who simply puts a scary mask on over a calm and collected businessman's face , I like that Osborn is always a villain but has these pyschotic breakdowns that define a full-on Goblin episode. Though since Slott and Superior Spider-Man I'm not sure that's true anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:04
|
|
|
I really enjoy and appreciate Spider-Man 3 despite knowing it's a mess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Little creepy that they were hanging around high schoolers though. Tobey was 27 in 2002
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:46
|
|
|
That was creepy too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
The Lizard school fight is easily my favorite out of all the Spider-Mans - imo nothing has been the same. ASM2 was a disaster though and I have no idea how they hosed up all that momentum. At least the costume rules.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:52
|
|
|
The action scenes in ASM are generally very good, and the movie has a great supporting cast, and Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield have better chemistry than Maguire and Dunst, but for me Spider-man lives and dies on how relatable Peter Parker is, and there's really just none of that in ASM. He's arrogant and smarmy even before the spider-bite, so after the spider-bite, to show change, Garfield has to amp it up to almost unbearable levels of prickishness. And the chemistry with Emma Stone even works against the character; they're way too cute and banter-y together. It works, but it doesn't work for the character. Never for a minute does it feel like the ASM Peter Parker would have trouble finding a girlfriend, or a seat in the lunchroom with popular kids. Peter Parker in ASM is written and acted as if he's Harry Osborn, not Peter Parker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:Tobey was 27 in 2002 At least in his Spider-Man movie they pretty quickly had him graduate from high school.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
Lobok posted:I think Norman has to be out of control every now and then. The main complaint about his characterization since returning from the dead is that he's too Luthor-like and so many of his best moments since are when he becomes unhinged. If you ever get the chance to check out Warren Ellis' run on Thunderbolts he does such a good job of showing Osborn slowly losing control. To your point, he and the Goblin have been one and the same for a long time but he's not quite the Hobgoblin who simply puts a scary mask on over a calm and collected businessman's face , I like that Osborn is always a villain but has these pyschotic breakdowns that define a full-on Goblin episode. I see your point. Just. I dunno. Willem DeFoe doesn’t feel like “my” Norman... which is in the end unfair I suppose because “My Norman” came into existence around the same time. But I stand by my comments on Otto.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 02:54
|
|
|
CityMidnightJunky posted:I loving love Spiderman 2 and a lot of it is because of the goofy Raimi touches like the over the top extras first time I watched this I started cackling aloud at 5:34 (I know, internet critic, but I kinda like this guy). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4THpqdEgbqo And gently caress it, just because I love his reason for not watching TASM2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-myJdkVKAk
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
God I just I hate Tobey MacGuire so much that it keeps me from having a rational opinion on the Rami movies. That and how it's pretty much the same movie three times with varying levels of quality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 03:38
|
|
|
I mean, Tom Holland is 30 years old
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 04:17
|
|
|
AlBorlantern Corps posted:I mean, Tom Holland is 30 years old Well he will be in 8 years. So close enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 04:19
|
|
|
X-O posted:Well he will be in 8 years. So close enough. Maybe time passes differently in the Snapverse, Peter is going to come back with a full beard and a glowing eye.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 04:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 13:08 |
|
|
Samuringa posted:Maybe time passes differently in the Snapverse, Peter is going to come back with a full beard and a glowing eye. I need Punished Spidey
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 05:24
|
|