| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gamesta
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 3636
$poons: 548.70
Location: SA
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Fyuusii wrote: | | Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: | | the franchise has more than proven it's worth in terms of quality and success. |
Success yes, quality no. |
Subjective.
|
Damn straight.I reckon the 1st and 2nd SM were brilliant quality.I was very pleassntly surprised at the quality of the 1st one after seeing a burnt copy of the film.The burnt copy made the movie look like a cheap piece of crap.Instead the movie was awesome as hell.
| Benza wrote: |
He's been a bad spiderman since Spiderman 1. Spiderman is supposed to be funny, a constant joker with bitches all over him. Instead we got a dry dull uncharismatic loser in costume and out. |
You know,. until you said that, I didn't even really see that.But now I do actually see how un peter Parker/SM like he was.
Though now that I think of it, that's not a problem in the 1st one really as it was just after the death of his uncle so not wisecraking all the time is actually understandable.I mean there was that time in the SM comics where PP/SM was so dull because he barely spoke a word.In fact he was in such a bad time of life that he refused to even aknowledge the PP side of himself.To him he was SM and SM only.
Anyway regardless of how bad Tobey was, I absolutely love the movies.Especisally the 1st one.
_________________
Welcome to the internet. Where any joke can turn into WWIII.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Pete
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 3794
$poons: 278.80
Location: Brisbane QLD
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Having recently watched the first Spiderman film I honestly don't have a problem with the film and while it's not exactly a feature that will lead me to gush mercilessly over it I was 100% satisfied with it.
I had no problems with Toby McGuire as Spiderman in this film either, there is a noticeable transformation there and his wholesome portrayal of Parker was fine for the role.
Then again this is a view from somebody who's only studied film and never the comic book series, the closest I've gotten to Spiderman before hand was the 90's Animated cartoon, action figures and some other random brief encounters with various media in the past. (All I really remember was reading a comic book where the villain was made up of bees, any help?).
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
XtremeXfactor
Status: Offline
Joined: 14 Jun 2008
Posts: 1339
$poons: 180.40
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I was 50/50 on the franchise, Superman is my favorite comic character.... DC my favorite comic studio (read more DC comics in my youth, still read my fair share of Marvel ones though).
At the time i thought it was alright, although i was not overly satisfied with the CGI used in the film(s). I just thought it was too unrealistic (i know it's a comic book film after all). The CGI improved from 2 & 3 though.
As a trilogy they were ok, (never saw the original at the cinema, but did go and see 2 & 3). I didn't have too much of an issue with the third, even though it was weaker than the first two...... in saying that i also thought that the BEST moment in the film happened Spoilers follow | Quote: | Peter Parker's cool strut..... j/k, i thought the Gwen Stacy rescue sequence was the best part of the movie  |
The second film was excellent on the first viewing at the cinema, loved it throughout. At the time i thought it just about eclipsed my feelings when i watched Superman for the first time. But then i saw it a few more times and it lost it's appeal.
Not sure the new one is going to work, it might put bums on seats.... but if people end up hating the end product, they won't go and see it a second or third time, nor would they buy the dvd.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DancesInUnderwear
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Oct 2005
Posts: 5194
$poons: 9.00
Location: radelaide
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Spiderman 3 being crap doesn't retroactively make the first two crap, as much as some people seem to want to make it so. They were good movies. Yes, I'm not a comic book nerd, so I don't know if Tobey Mcguire was exactly like Peter Parker, but he worked well.
I think this new one will be good also, even if I do feel its a bit too soon to do the Spiderman origin story again - why not just James Bond it, make standalone movies that allow you to chop and change any actors / directors / whatever you want? Perhaps this new continuity can be the start of that... but I doubt it.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sin Ogaris
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Dec 2005
Posts: 10616
$poons: 1588.60
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
I guess we could all look on the bright side, at least they made three of them and they didn't pull a Hulk on us (but both of the Hulk films were arse, so it didn't really bode well anyway).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyuusii
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2010
Posts: 1103
$poons: 213.80
Location: Perth, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Big Pete wrote: | | I had no problems with Toby McGuire as Spiderman in this film either, there is a noticeable transformation there and his wholesome portrayal of Parker was fine for the role. |
This.
What you're forgetting Benza is that Peter Parker was never a confident individual until he became Spider-Man.
To say that McGuire was bad for the role because he was dry, dull and uncharismatic... Well, he's meant to be. Being Spider-Man was what gave Peter Parker purpose and direction and one of the core values held by the franchise since it's inception was that Spidey was more of a real superhero than some phenomically powerful cosmic entity. This was due to his needing to deal with real-world issues, such as protecting his extremely fragile family and actually trying to put food on the table.
Spidey is c-o-c-k-y (stupid filter), yes. We see plenty of that in the Raimi franchise. Parker, not so much. That's actually ok.
_________________
"Now I stand, the lion before the lambs... and they do not fear.
They cannot fear..." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
theory
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 9112
$poons: 1275.00
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sin Ogaris wrote: | | I guess we could all look on the bright side, at least they made three of them and they didn't pull a Hulk on us (but both of the Hulk films were arse, so it didn't really bode well anyway). |
The Edward Norton one was pretty good IIRC.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JunkInTheBox
Status: Offline
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 630
$poons: 3.90
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
^ I liked the Ed Norton one too. I thought he did a good job as Bruce Banner.
The Eric Bana one wasn't too bad either if you totally ignore the fact that he fought these giant dogs that came out of nowhere and had no real explanation for being as big as they were. Apart from that, it wasn't that bad.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ObsoletE
Status: Offline
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 20357
$poons: 34.20
Location: Perth, WA :: Jubei'Thos
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
eh?
they were his father's dogs that he was experimenting on. they were Hulked out Dogs - the explanation for their being as big as they were was the same as Hulk himself.
I was actually one of the few people who liked the Ang Lee Hulk.
_________________
My Play-Asia Affiliate Link.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Fyuusii wrote: |
What you're forgetting Benza is that Peter Parker was never a confident individual until he became Spider-Man.
|
He wasn't confident but he was deffnintly charismatic.
I mean how many women are falling all overthemselves for him? In various continuities he's had
Betty Brant, Gwen Stacey, MJ, Liz Allen, kitty Pryde, Felicia Hardy, Emma Frost, Chat, etc. Usually with two or three at a time.
| Quote: |
To say that McGuire was bad for the role because he was dry, dull and uncharismatic... |
I'd have to disagree, Peter was an unpopular nerd, he was never dry or dull though. Deffintly not uncharismatic. That list of women he had falling for him, they all fell for peter not spidey. (Well except felcia)
| Quote: |
Spidey is c-o-c-k-y (stupid filter), yes. We see plenty of that in the Raimi franchise. Parker, not so much. That's actually ok. |
Spidey gets like what, one or two jokes in the entire trilogy?
On Hulk, the only problem I had with the Banner Hulk was the cluster fuck of whatever the ending fight was. The Norton one was still better though if only for Tim Roth's Blonsky.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyuusii
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2010
Posts: 1103
$poons: 213.80
Location: Perth, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: |
What you're forgetting Benza is that Peter Parker was never a confident individual until he became Spider-Man.
|
He wasn't confident but he was deffnintly charismatic.
I mean how many women are falling all overthemselves for him? In various continuities he's had
Betty Brant, Gwen Stacey, MJ, Liz Allen, kitty Pryde, Felicia Hardy, Emma Frost, Chat, etc. Usually with two or three at a time. |
And how many of those did he accrue before he attained the proportionate strength of a spider?
Somewhere in the vicinity of zilch (outside of passing interest from some of the girls).
| Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: |
To say that McGuire was bad for the role because he was dry, dull and uncharismatic... |
I'd have to disagree, Peter was an unpopular nerd, he was never dry or dull though. Deffintly not uncharismatic. That list of women he had falling for him, they all fell for peter not spidey. (Well except felcia) |
If that were the case, he would've had no issues fitting into society before becoming Spider-Man, and that wasn't the case.
| Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: |
Spidey is c-o-c-k-y (stupid filter), yes. We see plenty of that in the Raimi franchise. Parker, not so much. That's actually ok. |
Spidey gets like what, one or two jokes in the entire trilogy? |
An exaggeration, but I'll let that pass.
Maybe we don't see the wise-crackin' version of the character that is more familiar to the comics and cartoons, but honestly with how they were building the character in the Raimi trilogy I feel that doing this at any stage would be far too strong a paradigm shift. We started to see a lot more of this attitude flair in the third movie, which really wasn't as terrible as people make it out to be.
_________________
"Now I stand, the lion before the lambs... and they do not fear.
They cannot fear..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Fyuusii wrote: |
If that were the case, he would've had no issues fitting into society before becoming Spider-Man, and that wasn't the case. |
He never had major problems fitting into society, he just wasn't a popular jock and got picked on. Getting picked on in highschool doesn't mean 'you don't fit in with society' it means 'you're in highschool'
| Fyuusii wrote: |
Maybe we don't see the wise-crackin' version of the character that is more familiar to the comics and cartoons, but honestly with how they were building the character in the Raimi trilogy I feel that doing this at any stage would be far too strong a paradigm shift. We started to see a lot more of this attitude flair in the third movie, which really wasn't as terrible as people make it out to be. |
That's kind of my point, the wise cracks are not a small part of the character, removing that is removing a central part of who spiderman is and what his appeal is. The contrast from the shy persona of Peter, to out going joking sarcastic persona of Spiderman. The fact that under the mask since no one can see him lets Peter really be himself. Keeping his enemies off balance and getting them angry by constantly making fun of them. It's one of those things that like the Bridge scene in Spiderman 1 just show that the guys making the movies don't really get it.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyuusii
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2010
Posts: 1103
$poons: 213.80
Location: Perth, WA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: |
If that were the case, he would've had no issues fitting into society before becoming Spider-Man, and that wasn't the case. |
He never had major problems fitting into society, he just wasn't a popular jock and got picked on. Getting picked on in highschool doesn't mean 'you don't fit in with society' it means 'you're in highschool' |
I don't know what world you come from, but becoming the butt of bullying and harassment isn't exactly a prime case for fitting in in any environment.
| Benza wrote: | | Fyuusii wrote: |
Maybe we don't see the wise-crackin' version of the character that is more familiar to the comics and cartoons, but honestly with how they were building the character in the Raimi trilogy I feel that doing this at any stage would be far too strong a paradigm shift. We started to see a lot more of this attitude flair in the third movie, which really wasn't as terrible as people make it out to be. |
That's kind of my point, the wise cracks are not a small part of the character, removing that is removing a central part of who spiderman is and what his appeal is. The contrast from the shy persona of Peter, to out going joking sarcastic persona of Spiderman. The fact that under the mask since no one can see him lets Peter really be himself. Keeping his enemies off balance and getting them angry by constantly making fun of them. It's one of those things that like the Bridge scene in Spiderman 1 just show that the guys making the movies don't really get it. |
We might just have to agree to disagree on that point then. I love both of the potential personas; there's no real wrong done.
Well, except anything to do with f'kn clones. I really want to backhand someone for all that clone bullsh*t in the 90s.
_________________
"Now I stand, the lion before the lambs... and they do not fear.
They cannot fear..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
At least we got Ben Riley out of it.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Pete
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 3794
$poons: 278.80
Location: Brisbane QLD
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Honestly I'm fine with Parker not being a ladies man right off the bat. It plays on a trope a wide majority can relate to without too much exposition, trouble with love.
Anyways with Garfield there I feel fine with the re-boot, he's just different enough to not only fit the part but play it differently at the same time.
As for the Ed Norton Hulk, it was kind of like I don't know...Tron, you got exactly what you paid for, nothing more nothing less.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JunkInTheBox
Status: Offline
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 630
$poons: 3.90
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| ObsoletE wrote: | eh?
they were his father's dogs that he was experimenting on. they were Hulked out Dogs - the explanation for their being as big as they were was the same as Hulk himself.
I was actually one of the few people who liked the Ang Lee Hulk. |
Wow, I really don't remember that explanation. Sorry! The only time I've watched that movie was at the cinema and in bits & pieces when it was on tv a year after it came out. All I know is that I enjoyed it at the time and I probably should go watch it again.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrendanN
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 39
$poons: 3.40
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Well first of let me say i'm not real big on Comics and I don't know the spider-man like some of you guys, but I do have to say a few things about this.
First I really thought the Original Spider Man was amazing! I remember seeing it at the movies and thinking it was really, really good.
I thought it was good how Peter was in the movie and overall i thought Mcguire was great as him. Sorry but thats my opinion.
For me though the 3rd movie was terrible, and I can understand why a reboot is needed after that mess of a movie.
The First pic looks good, but I'm not sure if i agree on it looking like something some one made. It looks good don't get me wrong but everything from the spider on the chest to the gloves not being lined up looks like it was made with a lot of design and cash.
Also that pic of Spiderman running around with the red eyes looks really bad, Its fake as because the city is not lined up correctly to spider man (look at the nuts on the pillar and the background) and even the shadow is wrong, he is also clearly not walking on the ground. Finally look at his left arm that does not even look close to natural running (the only reason its like that is to show the web shooter). Looks like a good side on 3D render with a bad background placed on it.
I got to say (again I don't read comics) that the Lizard man baddy could turn out very very bad. I like things done well in movies and to have a realisim about them, like the new batman movies.
I think the Lizard man could come off cheezy and bit Dr Freeze if you know what i mean.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Its fake as because the city is not lined up correctly to spider man (look at the nuts on the pillar and the background) |
It's a hill?
| Quote: | | and even the shadow is wrong, |
| Quote: | | he is also clearly not walking on the ground. |
His back toe is touching the ground as his foot leaves the ground.
| Quote: | | Finally look at his left arm that does not even look close to natural running |
Looks like someone jogging to me.
Also there are other photos that show the exact same look for the costume of him on set.
| Quote: | | and to have a realisim about them, like the new batman movies. |
The Lizard has been a badguy in the comics for ages, spidermans world has never been as realistic as Batmans. It's always been full of crazy super powers and animal themed villians as opposed to Batmans repitouare of psycho killers.
I rekon Lizard will actually play out pretty great, similar to Two Face in The Dark Knight. Starting off as Peters friend, and teacher, then trying to cure his arm and going crazy etc.
[edit]
Other photos here
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/48129
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrendanN
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 39
$poons: 3.40
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Oh maybe, I just think his Left arm looks really twisted back, I'm no expert at all so I could be wrong but his arm looks like its gone back really far and his forearm looks a bit twisted as if to show the camera his web shooter.
To me he just looks off maybe its that his back is so straight as well. I would have thought there would have been a bit of a twist on his body when running while he looks very rigid. This made me think it was a render due to the fact he was so perfectly side on, as in he is running directly to the right on a surface (hill?) seems a bit odd. Also the background looks lower quality while spiderman looks very clean.
Really though I could be completely wrong.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It's an awkward pose for sure.
But he's in the middle of running or jogging, watch anyone run frame by frame and there will be heaps of really awkward poses.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BrendanN
Status: Offline
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 39
$poons: 3.40
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
After seeing those other pics you posted you are most likely correct.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
THEMAN
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 3526
$poons: 719.80
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Saw social Network last night. Now I have absolute faith that Garfield will prove to a pretty good spidey. He has the lankiness and the ability to quip right.
HYPE~~~
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Benza
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Mar 2008
Posts: 14586
$poons: 119.20
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 12:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
so it looks like they might be doing the web swinging as a practical effect instead of CG.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redemption
Status: Offline
Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Posts: 1494
$poons: 139.00
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Benza wrote: | so it looks like they might be doing the web swinging as a practical effect instead of CG.
|
Great if thats the case. When Spider-man 3 was on the other night, it looked horrible. Spidey was just stuck over the top of the picture, and that was always the case in the series.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fyuusii
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2010
Posts: 1103
$poons: 213.80
Location: Perth, WA
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
_________________
"Now I stand, the lion before the lambs... and they do not fear.
They cannot fear..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
