|
In theory though you can tell the Sandman killing uncle Ben, venom/black suit plots are supposed to be the throughline for the film: peter gets the black suit, turns into an angry douche, learns to let go and forgive and faces up to what he's inadvertantly created, thats his arc for the film. Harry follows the same arc learning to forgive Peter. Venom is a lovely version of peter who can't let go of his grudges. You can see what the writers were trying to do so I dont really buy the theory that Venom was a plot shoved in at the last minute ruining an already completed script. And I did like the moment when Harry forgives Peter and it all comes together, but the way it gets there leans on all kinds of weird and contrived bullshit and none of it works the way it should.
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 14:14 |
|
|
NadaTooma posted:Ever since Spiderman 3, I've wondered how it would have turned out had Raimi never been convinced to include Venom, especially since he never liked the character to begin with. A Sandman-only movie would have been fine at least without the retcon of him being Uncle Ben's killer, and maybe it wouldn't have been such a trainwreck. I think it would've been good. It would've paid off the story between him and Harry Osborn instead of relegating the whole thing to an infodump from a magical butler because there was literally no time to service the plot. There's a art book or something that was made during production of Spider-Man 3 and the scene where Venom convinces Sandman to join him is so much better I have no idea why it was cut and replaced with literally 3 lines in an Alleyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:15
|
|
|
NadaTooma posted:Ever since Spiderman 3, I've wondered how it would have turned out had Raimi never been convinced to include Venom, especially since he never liked the character to begin with. A Sandman-only movie would have been fine at least without the retcon of him being Uncle Ben's killer, and maybe it wouldn't have been such a trainwreck. He was always planning on having the Vulture be the other villain in the flick with Sandman until Avi Arad STRONGLY suggested that Venom replace him, here's some concept art: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:19
|
|
|
E the Shaggy posted:He was always planning on having the Vulture be the other villain in the flick with Sandman until Avi Arad STRONGLY suggested that Venom replace him. Yeah, and according to Wikipedia, The Vulture would have been played by none other than BEN loving KINGSLEY.  The awesomeness that might have been...
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:24
|
|
|
Then they were going to do Vulture in Spider-Man 4 before it got canned. John Malcovitch would have played him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Then they were going to do Vulture in Spider-Man 4 before it got canned. John Malcovitch would have played him. He was also supposed to be Mary Jane's biological father.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:There's a art book or something that was made during production of Spider-Man 3 and the scene where Venom convinces Sandman to join him is so much better I have no idea why it was cut and replaced with literally 3 lines in an Alleyway. What was the scrapped scene?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:42
|
|
|
Ignitus posted:What was the scrapped scene? I'd assume it's similar to the game, where Venom kidnaps Sandman's ex-wife and daughter and uses them as leverage. Hackneyed and obvious, but it would at the very least make a lot more sense than what we eventually got, plus give the daughter a purpose rather than showing up once and never being mentioned again. Although come to think of it, the "how did Venom know about Sandman's family" plot hole would still be there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:46
|
|
|
This isn't Donald Glover, I'm not interested. Honestly bored of yet another skinny white nerdy kid playing a reboot of pretty much the same movie, but now DARKER! I just don't see them doing anything at all loving interesting with the premise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
This seems like it could be decent and I'll probably see it because comic movies are mindless and fun, but seriously, what is it with people making GBS threads themselves in joy over the web shooters being mechanical now (just judging by the top rated YouTube comment and some of the discussion here)? I'm with Stan Lee on this one, the organic webbing made perfect sense. Like, I understand Parker is supposed to be smart and whatever but the idea that web shooters are some major sticking point is funny to me. I realize the majority of the people here aren't making a big deal out of it one way or the other though. Jefferoo posted:This isn't Donald Glover, I'm not interested. Honestly bored of yet another skinny white nerdy kid playing a reboot of pretty much the same movie, but now DARKER! Wait what? Was there honestly some rumor going around that Donald Glover was playing Spider-Man or something? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
I'm glad Peter at least has semi-biggish hair in this one. There are not nearly enough protagonists with big hair in current film (at least in big box office hits).
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:This seems like it could be decent and I'll probably see it because comic movies are mindless and fun, but seriously, what is it with people making GBS threads themselves in joy over the web shooters being mechanical now (just judging by the top rated YouTube comment and some of the discussion here)? I'm with Stan Lee on this one, the organic webbing made perfect sense. Fan petitions and such. Honestly, I am glad he didn't. Now he can be doing other, better things with his career. People getting butt hurt by him not getting picked is hilarious though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:09
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:Fan petitions and such. Honestly, I am glad he didn't. Now he can be doing other, better things with his career. Yeah I mean I loving love Donald Glover but what the gently caress?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
I was (and still am) willing to give this reboot a chance, but man that trailer is at best underwhelming. The dark & gritty colors don't.. fit Spider-Man all that well. He doesn't even seem to have fun when he suddenly goes first-person Mirror's Edge there, just.. I don't know. Am I the only one that feels like the tone seems wrong? Spider-Man is not Batman. Jefferoo posted:This isn't Donald Glover, I'm not interested. Honestly bored of yet another skinny white nerdy kid playing a reboot of pretty much the same movie, but now DARKER! Everyone knows the basic origin of Spider-Man. Sure there are some differences they need to address now (non-organic web shooters) and such, but man.. I was really, really hoping they'd gloss over the origin story and move onto something bigger. The whole "Yep, I'm still in High School!" aspect kind of makes me want to gag, I've always hated that cliche. Blazing Ownager fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jul 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:11
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I was (and still am) willing to give this reboot a chance, but man that trailer is at best underwhelming. The dark & gritty colors don't.. fit Spider-Man all that well. He doesn't even seem to have fun when he suddenly goes first-person Mirror's Edge there, just.. I don't know. Nah I'm basically on board with this. I'll give it a shot for sure, the casting seems pretty good, etc. but the change in tone seems a little...odd. Reading the YouTube comments hurts my brain because hardcore fans of anything are basically the worst. Correct me if I'm wrong here but isn't Peter Parker SUPPOSED to be sort of a light-hearted, wisecracking sort of character most of the time, more akin to Maguire's portrayal? Some of the people in the YouTube comments are like "OH gently caress YEAH THIS IS SO MUCH CLOSER TO THE COMICS NOT THAT GOOFY RAIMI poo poo" (one dude in particular) and it's confusing to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:16
|
|
|
Jefferoo posted:This isn't Donald Glover, I'm not interested. Honestly bored of yet another skinny white nerdy kid playing a reboot of pretty much the same movie, but now DARKER! I like Donald Glover but the fact is he just not as good an actor as Andrew Garfield. Although, I'm not looking forward to seeing the whole bitten by a radioactive spider part again, everyone knows how that plays out and just wants to se Spider-Man kick the Lizard in the tail or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
I've always disliked Maguire's portrayal. He seemed like a bad pick from the beginning to me. Though I don't know exactly how much of that is due to the campy Raimi style that just didn't click with me. He was nowhere near as horrible as Dunst though. And I just have to laugh at anyone that is somehow seriously pissed or upset that Donald Glover didn't get the role. I just can't taken anyone like that seriously. He was never a contender and never even auditioned for it. It's just one of those stupid things that a few people got all excited about for some strange reason and most of them had forgotten a week later. X-O fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Jul 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:21
|
|
|
Deadpool posted:I've always disliked Maguire's portrayal. He seemed like a bad pick from the beginning to me. Though I don't know exactly how much of that is due to the campy Raimi style that just didn't click with me. He nowhere near as horrible as Dunst though. Help me out here. Isn't that campy style sort of in the spirit of the comics at least when it comes to the actual Peter Parker/Spider-Man character? I always thought he was SUPPOSED to be a slightly goofy and awkward wise-rear end, at least early on in the "story".
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:25
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Help me out here. Isn't that campy style sort of in the spirit of the comics at least when it comes to the actual Peter Parker/Spider-Man character? I always thought he was SUPPOSED to be a slightly goofy and awkward wise-rear end, at least early on in the "story". He's a neurotic guy who's life is pretty harsh, but he manages to be wisecracking wise-rear end anyways.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:28
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Help me out here. Isn't that campy style sort of in the spirit of the comics at least when it comes to the actual Peter Parker/Spider-Man character? I always thought he was SUPPOSED to be a slightly goofy and awkward wise-rear end, at least early on in the "story". Campy and goofy? Maybe if we're talking the originals from the sixties. All comics back in that era were goofy to a degree. But the basics of Peter Parker the character are that he was troubled as a teen. He was a kid who had real world type problems. Dead parents, a dead uncle that he was the cause of, an elderly aunt that he had to help provide for, got picked on in school and so on. He was shy and nerdy and had the worst luck imaginable. He wasn't goofy or wise cracking at all. Until he put on the mask. The mask let him escape from the troubles of his life and be a different person because he could hide himself. Once he gained confidence in himself he let some of that bleed over into his life without the mask.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:32
|
|
|
Deadpool posted:Campy and goofy? Maybe if we're talking the originals from the sixties. All comics back in that era were goofy to a degree. But the basics of Peter Parker the character are that he was troubled as a teen. He was a kid who had real world type problems. Dead parents, a dead uncle that he was the cause of, an elderly aunt that he had to help provide for, got picked on in school and so on. He was shy and nerdy and had the worst luck imaginable. He wasn't goofy or wise cracking at all. Until he put on the mask. The mask let him escape from the troubles of his life and be a different person because he could hide himself. Once he gained confidence in himself he let some of that bleed over into his life without the mask. Okay, I genuinely wasn't trying to act like I knew better, that's why I asked. Thanks for the clarification. Some of the comic dudes commenting on Youtube are still the worst though. Except for the part where what you described was pretty much Maguire's portrayal too? He was incredibly shy and awkward pre-bite and they showed him taking care of Aunt May and all that. I guess I don't see where you think Maguire's portrayal was so off, but then again this may be a derail.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Yeah I mean I loving love Donald Glover but what the gently caress? Donald Glover the person is literally Peter Parker. He would have been an amazing choice for Spidey and while I'm excited like a 12 year old boy for this movie I 100% positive that it would have been whole orders of magnitudes better with Glover. He even has a joke about it in his act that goes something like..."Peter Parker a troubled kid who lives in Harlem, and doesnt know his real parents and can barely hold down a job and gets picked on. But he's white?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Starsnostars posted:I like Donald Glover but the fact is he just not as good an actor as Andrew Garfield. Although, I'm not looking forward to seeing the whole bitten by a radioactive spider part again, everyone knows how that plays out and just wants to se Spider-Man kick the Lizard in the tail or whatever. Yeah, but he fits the role of Parker better. Neurotic nerdy kid with wisecracks who was picked on in school more or less fits the role better than Garfield. My point is more or less that it's irrelevant about it being Glover or even a black man, but that it's literally going to be the same movie as before, but OH MAN SO DARK SO GRIM SO REEEEAAAALLL. I just don't see the point of it. What Teepkick Shakur said.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 20:55
|
|
|
Teepkick Shakur posted:Donald Glover the person is literally Peter Parker. He would have been an amazing choice for Spidey and while I'm excited like a 12 year old boy for this movie I 100% positive that it would have been whole orders of magnitudes better with Glover. I dunno, if it was something like he auditioned for it and didn't get it or something then I might get the rage a bit but he apparently didn't so  .
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:05
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:I dunno, if it was something like he auditioned for it and didn't get it or something then I might get the rage a bit but he apparently didn't so He organized a whole online campaign to get him an audition and they were all "lol, black protagionist in a comic book movie?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:06
|
|
|
Ignitus posted:What was the scrapped scene? - The scene of Venom aligning himself with the Sandman is very different. Sandman takes the form of a rather large sandcastle in a park, just as his ex-wife and daughter come by. Penny plays with the sandcastle briefly. When Penny and her mother aren’t looking for a moment, the sandcastle disappears. Venom talks to Sandman from the shadows, beneath a tree. He brings up Sandman’s family as conversation, not as a threat, but as a way to illustrate how bitter he is at what he feels Parker’s taken from him. It's way more nuanced than 'KIDNAP!' and production stills from the scene exist but no idea why they ditched it for an arguably worse scene.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:10
|
|
|
Jefferoo posted:He organized a whole online campaign to get him an audition and they were all "lol, black protagionist in a comic book movie?" I thought it was just a bunch of fans, not him. Okay that's slightly less dumb now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:12
|
|
|
SamuraiFoochs posted:Okay, I genuinely wasn't trying to act like I knew better, that's why I asked. Thanks for the clarification. Some of the comic dudes commenting on Youtube are still the worst though. My problem with Maguire was that he just didn't fit the role. He just didn't create that memorable Spider-Man persona that you get when the actor and the character they play are matched correctly in these types of movies. For example, when I think of Iron Man, Batman, Superman, and Wolverine I immediately think of the actors that portray them. Downey, Bale, Reeve, and Jackman took those roles and made it almost impossible for you to separate the actor from the character. That doesn't happen when I think of Spider-Man. I think also there's no since of escapism for Peter in Raimi's movies. I never feel that once Peter puts on the mask he's able to let go of all of his personal issues and just be Spider-Man. He's just the same old Peter with a mask on. One reason is that for some reason Raimi has to tie all of the villains back to Peter personally somehow. I thought that was a huge misstep in the films. I understand wanting to create another level of dramatic tension in the films but I don't believe that tying all of the villains personally to Peter is the way to go about it. And I think the movies suffer for that reason. I'll give you Norman. That's a given. That one's ok. But there's no need for a personal involvement with Doc Ock or Sandman. And let's not even get into Brock. And I mentioned it in the other thread but what happened to villains just being villains? Why the need to craft a story to try and make me feel sympathy for Doc Ock or Sandman? Why can't a bad guy just be a bad guy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:14
|
|
|
Jefferoo posted:He organized a whole online campaign to get him an audition and they were all "lol, black protagionist in a comic book movie?" He didnt organize it, it just came alive on its own on the internet and he went "well if that happens, I'm up for it!".
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:26
|
|
|
I feel sorry for whoever has to try to be Tony Stark after Robert Downey Jr.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:28
|
|
|
Yannick_B posted:He didnt organize it, it just came alive on its own on the internet and he went "well if that happens, I'm up for it!". Actually he did start it. He began the whole ordeal on twitter and then it grew into a huge thing that he didn't intend. A few hundred thousand people supported the idea and started letter writing campaigns and online petitions to get him into the role. It got so big that once Sony decided they were not going to consider him for the roll they called him directly and begged him to tell people that he wasn't going to be in the movie so they would stop writing and calling. I believe he discusses the whole thing on an old episode of Comedy Death Ray if you're interested.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:33
|
|
|
SageSepth posted:Personally, it has nothing to do with Batman and everything to do with the amount of angsty BS and other nonsense. The first 2 films are fine, organic web shooters aside, but that third one is a train wreck in the worst way. For starters it's not even really about Spiderman, it seemed more about everyone else. Kirstin Dunst has 2 singing sequences, neither are any good, Toby Mcguire has 2 dancing sequences neither are any good. They gave Venom to that horrible hack of an actor, he's in no way capable of pulling off Eddie Brock, let alone using his size as a template for Venom. The whole point to Venom is he's bigger stronger and more brutal then Spiderman, not an insane clone of him. James Franco. The suit they were using for Green Goblin 2 looked like something from a Power Rangers episode, also for some reason he had a lightsaber. Some how, the guy who was cheating off of Pete in the first movie managed to improve on his insane dads formula's to make better Goblin gear, cause that makes sense. Dancing. This is a list of everything great in Spidey 3, yes. Raimi trolled you good. "Why isn't venom 'brutal'? Why is everyone singing, dancing and crying? It killed a billion-dollar Sony franchise!"  Better than Spidey 2, easily.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:37
|
|
|
Deadpool posted:My problem with Maguire was that he just didn't fit the role. He just didn't create that memorable Spider-Man persona that you get when the actor and the character they play are matched correctly in these types of movies. For example, when I think of Iron Man, Batman, Superman, and Wolverine I immediately think of the actors that portray them. Downey, Bale, Reeve, and Jackman took those roles and made it almost impossible for you to separate the actor from the character. That doesn't happen when I think of Spider-Man. I don't know, there are quite a few scenes of him swinging around just loving what he does. I like the first Raimi movie, love SM2, but 3...ugh. If only they had gone Vulture-Sandman. What could have been  I like the trailer for this one up until the first person view. That's where they lose me. I'm sure that won't be in the movie. I hope 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:42
|
|
|
RembrandtQEinstein posted:I don't know, there are quite a few scenes of him swinging around just loving what he does. I agree with all of this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
Blazing Ownager posted:I was (and still am) willing to give this reboot a chance, but man that trailer is at best underwhelming. The dark & gritty colors don't.. fit Spider-Man all that well. He doesn't even seem to have fun when he suddenly goes first-person Mirror's Edge there, just.. I don't know. Yes, you and you alone feel like this. No one has pointed it out so far. It wasn't just fan petitions hoping for Donglover, he himself was pushing for it. He would have been great too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
God almighty this film looks boring as hell. Spider-Man's supposed to be about the wisecracking and this looks like it's going a "dark" route, plus it's almost exactly the same as the Raimi story. Pass.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 22:31
|
|
|
SageSepth posted:Personally, it has nothing to do with Batman and everything to do with the amount of angsty BS and other nonsense. The first 2 films are fine, organic web shooters aside, but that third one is a train wreck in the worst way. For starters it's not even really about Spiderman, it seemed more about everyone else. Kirstin Dunst has 2 singing sequences, neither are any good, Toby Mcguire has 2 dancing sequences neither are any good. They gave Venom to that horrible hack of an actor, he's in no way capable of pulling off Eddie Brock, let alone using his size as a template for Venom. The whole point to Venom is he's bigger stronger and more brutal then Spiderman, not an insane clone of him. James Franco. The suit they were using for Green Goblin 2 looked like something from a Power Rangers episode, also for some reason he had a lightsaber. Some how, the guy who was cheating off of Pete in the first movie managed to improve on his insane dads formula's to make better Goblin gear, cause that makes sense. Dancing. Yes, 3 was bad, it's well known that that's due to story issues brought about by studio meddling and I didn't really think I needed to explicitly spell out that I wasn't talking about that one. What about the first two? X-men now feels dated but was good at the time. Same with Spidey 1. X-men 2 holds up pretty well but since has been outdone by other superhero movies. Same with Spidey 2. Why does Raimi get shat upon but Singer does not? Because Singer wasn't forced by the studio to make a bad 3rd entry? Oh yeah, and SMG is right, you haven't even mentioned the bad parts of Spidey 3 yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 22:39
|
|
|
I just hope there's some drat wall-crawling in this film. Yeah, I know Spider-Man swings everywhere, but it would be nice to see his scuttling up a wall, across a ceiling, etc for more than just one shot. Yeah, yeah, nitpick, I know. edit: okay, finally saw the trailer, looks like there's a bit. But crap, that movie doesn't look all that exciting to me. Davros1 fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Jul 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 22:50
|
|
|
I tend to prefer comic book movies with a single well-developed villain. It's hard to fit 2-3 villains in a film and have them feel like anything more than human setpieces.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 14:14 |
|
|
Quantum of Phallus posted:plus it's almost exactly the same as the Raimi story. How?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2011 23:03
|
|
