|
Jamesman posted:Remember how in the first Spider-Man movie, they felt the need to explain how Peter could stick to things by showing these weird gross barbed hairs growing from his fingers, but that just raised even more questions? What questions? Spider-Bite caused mutations. Made him a sticky boy That’s all you ever needed
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 09:59 |
|
|
Lurdiak posted:In the comics the explanation is technically that he has static cling on his extremities, because that's the closest to something that makes any sense the marvel handbook people could come up with. Even though that has nothing to do with spiders. It can't have anything to do with how spiders climb and still make sense at a human scale, like the barbed hairs. Super static cling is as good an explanation as any other. It's Spider-Man's version of tactile telekinesis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
I mean, super-static cling is basically how spiders actually climb walls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
They also needed a way to explain how it works over his clothes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:10
|
|
|
Unstable molecules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:I mean, super-static cling is basically how spiders actually climb walls. But Spider-Man has it in a "just because" way. His body is not physiologically any different than the next person's when it comes to scaling walls except for this cling effect he produces out of nothing. It's like how he can see and detect danger from all around him, not because of bigger/more eyes or because of vibrations felt on webs or hairs, but just because ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:34
|
|
|
The Barb's don't stick to walls, they vibrate against each other to create static cling. Please send my no prize to Pleasant Hill Missouri
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
Spider-Man uses tiny hairs all over his body to cling to walls, and Superman uses tiny wings all over his body to fly, deal with it
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:Spider-Man uses tiny hairs all over his body to cling to walls, and Superman uses tiny wings all over his body to fly, deal with it No the Superman equivalent is that he doesn't fly he unknowingly uses telekinesis to envelop himself in an invisible field and propel himself through the air. It's a John Byrne special!
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
X-O posted:No the Superman equivalent is that he doesn't fly he unknowingly uses telekinesis to envelop himself in an invisible field and propel himself through the air. It's a John Byrne special! I think that was the joke since people talked about the static cling.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
I'll still go to bat for the webs just being part of his superpowers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
The spider didn't bite him and give him spider powers. It injected him with radiated venom that mutated him, and he paid tribute to the spider to create his superhero persona. You plebs. You absolute dolts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 00:12
|
|
|
Jamesman posted:The spider didn't bite him and give him spider powers. It injected him with radiated venom that mutated him, and he paid tribute to the spider to create his superhero persona. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 00:17
|
|
SonicRulez posted:I'll still go to bat for the webs just being part of his superpowers. 
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
X-O posted:No the Superman equivalent is that he doesn't fly he unknowingly uses telekinesis to envelop himself in an invisible field and propel himself through the air. It's a John Byrne special! He actually moves the universe around him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
I've never heard a good reason against it that did not begin and end with "That's not how it was in the 60's." Webs are a spider's most defining trait. I've never in life looked at a spider and thought "Wow, look at their incredible ability to predict danger." It would be like if he got bit by a radioactive fish and couldn't breathe underwater.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 05:33
|
|
|
None of his other powers are really things spiders do, why should the webs be any different?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 05:36
|
|
|
SonicRulez posted:I'll still go to bat for the webs just being part of his superpowers. The first Spider-man thing I saw were the Raimi films so the idea that he needed some gadget to shoot web has always seemed bafflingly stupid to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 05:55
|
|
|
Peter Parker is a genius inventor who once worked for a think tank reverse engineering his superhero gear into consumer products. For example, he had to fight a person with sonic powers that required him to build a suit that muffled out all sound so he made noise cancelling headphones with the tech.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 06:05
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:The first Spider-man thing I saw were the Raimi films so the idea that he needed some gadget to shoot web has always seemed bafflingly stupid to me. "I got bitten by a radioactive spider, so then I built these gadgets so I could do spider things!" "Did... did the bite have anything to do with that?" "No, it just got me thinking about spiders!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:The first Spider-man thing I saw were the Raimi films so the idea that he needed some gadget to shoot web has always seemed bafflingly stupid to me. Yep, and still is. It’s never once come up as any kind of dramatic plot point in the Holland films and it did show up a bit in the Garfield ones but they were bad and I hate them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 06:54
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Yep, and still is. It’s never once come up as any kind of dramatic plot point in the Holland films and it did show up a bit in the Garfield ones but they were bad and I hate them. The webshooters come up a lot in the Holland films because they give him different webs. He also runs out in Far From Home. Webshooters are great and it's better when Peter creates them and the webbing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 06:57
|
|
|
I propose that Spiderman does have webshooters but he refills them with his butt
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 07:58
|
|
|
Fangz posted:I propose that Spiderman does have webshooters but he refills them with his butt https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrP1_5XuKLI
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 08:05
|
|
SonicRulez posted:I've never heard a good reason against it that did not begin and end with "That's not how it was in the 60's." Then you ain't been listening right. Spider-man is as much of a scientist as he is a teenager and a photographer, so it makes perfect sense to have a major part of his arsenal be a gadget he whipped up. It gives him a bit of a low-rent Batman aspect, and primes you to believe he can figure out complicated science problems the villains cook up. Plus, the webs being mechanical means he can run out to create dramatic tension, worry about the web fluid production cutting into his meager budget, create variants to take on supervillains with specific power-sets, have the webshooters get crushed off his wrists by a particularly strong villain... it creates a texture to the power as something separate from his natural abilities that he basically has to work at. It also makes it cool because then you can draw neat diagrams explaining how the web-shooters work and put them in a super-sized annual issue. I do appreciate that the Sam Raimi films managed to contrive a way for Spider-man to run out of webbing and fall to his near death in mid-air despite them being organic, which is my favorite thing Spider-man does. I distinctly remember leaning over to a friend in the theater and saying "that's his move!".
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 09:43
|
|
|
That little scene in Homecoming where Peter is trying out new web formulas in class is such a little thing, but I absolutely love it for being able to convey so much information about the character in such a short amount of time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
The way Ben Reilly used to wear bulky webshooters on the outside of the costume was cool as hell don't @ me
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
I posted that Joker review because I'm fascinated by its existence, and look forward to reading about how it got made because right now it seems like a hot mess of juvenile film making. Like there's a team at Warner bros right now trying to Weinstein their way into shoving it into the awards circuit, which I find pretty funny. And Todd Phillips, who has a Neanderthal like grasp of nuance and a particularly scathing Neil Lebute-like disdain for anything not white and male handling it is especially delicious. excited to see it come out! e: woops didn't see the mod thing, I can stop talking about it. Shageletic fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Sep 5, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
You know if they had just given the role to LaKeith Stanfield half the arguments against it would have been avoided.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 13:49
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:You know if they had just given the role to LaKeith Stanfield half the arguments against it would have been avoided. It would have just resulted in equally asinine arguments on a different part of the web
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 14:23
|
|
|
Raffles posted:It would have just resulted in equally asinine arguments on a different part of the web Yeah but I don't hang out in that part of the web.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 14:38
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:You know if they had just given the role to LaKeith Stanfield half the arguments against it would have been avoided. Sure, because I don't think the argument is "don't make movies about the Joker," it's that this particular narrative, about a white man specifically being pushed over the edge, is boring. A sad, minor key version of a popular tune played over slow-motion meandering is boring. There are lots of ways to spice up the character, and some of them I'd even probably be interested in watching a movie about. I think a black Joker would be one of those, because then the character's fundamental rejection of normalized relations to power looks a lot different. That character loudly saying no in the way that the Joker character typically would definitely signify something other than "Bartleby but fucken twisted" as too many recent Joker takes have done. On a similar note, and I won't spoil much, but the recent Mariko Tamaki OGN Breaking Glass has a really great take on the Joker, again precisely because she hones in on the elements of the character that have become tired or rote and just gets rid of them. So he's familiar enough to be legible, but novel enough to be exciting, and one really basic change in his backstory lets him play a really fresh role in the story.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 15:58
|
|
|
Sgt. Politeness posted:You know if they had just given the role to LaKeith Stanfield half the arguments against it would have been avoided. It would have actually been interesting yeah Like seriously we don't get any movies where black people (especially men) in America are allowed to be angry at the unjust society that brought us to this country as literal property
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 16:10
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Then you ain't been listening right. Spider-man is as much of a scientist as he is a teenager and a photographer, so it makes perfect sense to have a major part of his arsenal be a gadget he whipped up. It gives him a bit of a low-rent Batman aspect, and primes you to believe he can figure out complicated science problems the villains cook up. Plus, the webs being mechanical means he can run out to create dramatic tension, worry about the web fluid production cutting into his meager budget, create variants to take on supervillains with specific power-sets, have the webshooters get crushed off his wrists by a particularly strong villain... it creates a texture to the power as something separate from his natural abilities that he basically has to work at. I also hate every inch of the "he's a scientist" argument, no cap. Spider-Man media is supposed to feature so many gadgets. SO many. The tracker spider, the spotlight (lmao), the spy-der bots, whatever. He can tinker and invent and design his own suit. So many opportunities for Spider-Man media to show the kid is a nerd. As you pointed out, Spidey can still run out of webs if they come out of his body. It would make sense for him to have a finite supply that builds over time. Especially if he's aware of how long it takes to refill. Time is a great source of tension. From all that, I can see mechanic shooters being comparable, but not better. Aphrodite posted:None of his other powers are really things spiders do, why should the webs be any different? I've seen many spiders scurry up walls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 16:59
|
|
|
organic webs are gross
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
Spider-Man is gross
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 17:33
|
|
|
in addition to organic webs, they should give him detachable palps
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 17:47
|
|
|
the organic webs are his poop
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
Lakeith Stanfield has cooler things to be doing than a Joker movie.SonicRulez posted:I've seen many spiders scurry up walls. Not with magic static cling you didn't. Spider-Man gets bitten by a spider and mutates to have some stuff sort of like spiders can do but none of them how spiders actually do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 09:59 |
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Not with magic static cling you didn't. or... did you https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/spiders-fly-on-the-currents-of-earths-electric-field
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2019 18:04
|
|