Spider-Man

[Mr. Marshmallow]

I personally love the series and I'm looking forward to the 3rd. I think there's alot more going for the series then JUST Depp but that's me personally, and I think everyone can agree that Spider man's only real competition far as big blockbuster movies this summer is Pirates 3.

Transformers, Harry potter 5, Shrek the 3rd may be pretty big fish, but I don't think anyone will match Spider man's cash income. Pirates is the closest film series that could make that mark.

[Invader Bloo]

I just got into Spider-Man when CN showed it, I just saw the 2nd one last night.

I'm going to see the 3rd one soon.

[GrimTheLost]

Originally Posted by Mr. Marshmallow

I personally love the series and I'm looking forward to the 3rd. I think there's alot more going for the series then JUST Depp but that's me personally, and I think everyone can agree that Spider man's only real competition far as big blockbuster movies this summer is Pirates 3.

Transformers, Harry potter 5, Shrek the 3rd may be pretty big fish, but I don't think anyone will match Spider man's cash income. Pirates is the closest film series that could make that mark.

I don't know, Transformers and HP 5 are going to be bigger in my opinion. All of the geeky people who saw SM will geek out of these two. I know I will.

[jekylljuice]

Originally Posted by Ditchy McAbandonpants

I'm seeing Spider-Man 3 later today, so I'll probably be back to post my thoughts up on it later, but already I'm invisaging grand things for Spider-Man 4, starring Samuel L. Jackson as Big Wheel, Al Pacino as The Gibbon, and Paul Newman as Turner D. Century.

Paul Newman kicks solid-gold butt. You have no idea how elated I would be if that actually came to pass.

[Ditchy McAbandonpants]

jekylljuice: Uh...did you follow my link and see who Turner D. Century actually is? He's a supervillain whose primary defining trait is that he, uh, hates social change and young people. His supervillain weapons are a flamethrower umbrella and a flying tandem bike, which he rides on his own with a mannequin in a pink dress, presumably because he has no actual friends. His supervillain apparel consists of a straw boater, a green stripey jacket and a handlebar moustache. Now, I know Paul Newman is a legend, but I think even he'd struggle to pull this one off.

As for this summer's box office battle, I'm not sure there's enough money in the world to cover all of the absolutely massive releases coming in the next few months; after Spidey comes Shrek the Third, Pirates 3, Ocean's Thirteen, Fantastic Four 2, Die Hard 4, Harry Potter 5, Transformers, The Simpsons Movie, Ratatouille, The Bourne Ultimatum...I think we're going to see all sorts of records set this year. If we're talking in purely US box office terms, I reckon we're looking at, appropriately enough, a three-way fight between Spider-Man 3, Pirates 3 and Shrek 3, simply based on box office pedigree so far. I think you all are really underestimating Shrek's domestic appeal; Shrek 2 is the third highest grossing movie of all time in the US, ahead everything except Titanic and Star Wars, and it achieved that feat in direct competition with Spider-Man 2. Worldwide I'd throw Harry Potter into the mix, too, possibly ahead of Spider-Man and Shrek; not many current franchises match the mass global appeal of HP and Pirates, though the early success of Spider-Man 3 might challenge that. Elsewhere, I'm expecting very solid but not record-breaking stuff from Transformers, Simpsons, Ratatouille and Bourne, whilst I have a hunch that Ocean's, Die Hard and Fantastic Four might disappoint somewhat. Mark my words there; we'll see if I'm right!

As for what I'm actually looking forward to, Ratatouille and Harry Potter are the ones that I'm really desperate to see, whilst I'm optimistic about Pirates, Bourne and Transformers (despite all the indications that I shouldn't be). Shrek and Simpsons I'll monitor, but they're really going to have to do a heck of a lot to convince me to shell out my money; the rest I can live without.

[jekylljuice]

Originally Posted by Ditchy McAbandonpants

jekylljuice: Uh...did you follow my link and see who Turner D. Century actually is? He's a supervillain whose primary defining trait is that he, uh, hates social change and young people. His supervillain weapons are a flamethrower umbrella and a flying tandem bike, which he rides on his own with a mannequin in a pink dress, presumably because he has no actual friends. His supervillain apparel consists of a straw boater, a green stripey jacket and a handlebar moustache. Now, I know Paul Newman is a legend, but I think even he'd struggle to pull this one off.

Yeah, I followed. The man sounds absolutely fantastic. Plus, with that whole deal with the mannequin in the pink dress and his lack of any living, sentient companions, you have some potential for character depth.

And I actually think Mr. Newman would be pretty good at playing that role...if the Spider-Man movies ever go down the route of campiness. You gotta admit it would be surreal.

[Ditchy McAbandonpants]

jekylljuice: Wow...you know what, the more I look at Mr. Century, the more I become convinced that Paul Newman might actually work. And hey, from my point of view, it's bound to be better than Spider-Man 3, eh? If you want to see a fairly damning (not to mention incredibly foul-mouthed) analysis of Turny D, check out this profile of him. Amusing pictures abound!


Also, I just finished rewatching Spider-Man like I said I was going to...I'm not going to pretend that it's not a flawed movie, but my lord, I can't get over how badly I think this film mops the floor with its sequels. The first hour or so in particular, where the film is dealing with Peter's transformation into Spider-Man, is just a joyful, innocent and satisfying ride that channels, if not the exact details, then definitely the honest and relatable spirit of the old comics that I loved, grounded by a sweetly likable Tobey Maguire and pleasant support work from Kirsten Dunst and James Franco, as well as Rosemary Harris and Cliff Robertson. David Koepp's script keeps things moving at a pretty brisk pace, but it hits all the right emotional beats along the way, and he sells the characters with his straightforward and lighthearted yet believable dialogue; Raimi does his part with good, sensible direction punctuated by some stylish flourishes (the costume design sequence is so much fun) and slick action scenes, despite the rubbery CG.

Most of the flaws of this film arise in the second half; once Peter has become Spider-Man, the momentum of the origin story itself runs out, and the film seems to struggle to replace it with anything. Willem Dafoe is thoroughly brilliant as Norman Osborn, throwing himself whole-heartedly into the cackling Goblin persona yet also really selling him as a friendly mentor and as a callous, conflicted father, but in his role as the movie's villain, he's a little weak. The unthreatening costume doesn't help, but worse than that the film seems to have trouble establishing and justifying his conflict with Spider-Man, meaning their battles some off as somewhat forced and unclear in terms of narrative purpose and significance. Maybe to compensate, the film starts ratcheting up the corn, with certain scenes and lines starting to stretch credibilty too far, notably Peter and MJ's conversations in the hospital and the graveyard, and of course the ridiculous "New Yorkers beat the Goblin by throwing trash at him" scene.

Despite those problems though, this remains a film that I really like, and I just cannot get my head around the fact that the same creative team could have produced sequels that I hated so much. The obvious answer is the one area that saw a significant personnel change between this and 2 and 3: writing, with the replacement of the very accomplished blockbuster writer David Koepp with Alvin Sargent, a man who, despite having won two Oscars, to me honestly seems like someone who doesn't know how to structure a scene or invest it with any sense of purpose, or how to put a together a logically flowing story, or indeed even have a clue what human beings sound like (interestingly, I hear he did an uncredited rewrite on the first film, which might explain those problematic Pete/MJ conversations that I referred to earlier). Still, that doesn't explain why Raimi's ability to structure and pace went out of the window as well as his ability to shoot action coherently (I'm sorry, but the famous Spider-Man 2 train sequence gave me a headache), or why the likes of Maguire, Franco, Dunst and Harris suddenly became so awful...

Ugh, sorry, I'm getting sucked back in to that negative mindset again, and I don't want to do that; what I wanted to do was remind people that Spider-Man, even though people have started to overlook it somewhat, remains a great movie, a bright, fun and lovingly-crafted superhero movie, and a worthy treatment of our Spidey.

[Mr. Marshmallow]

After hearing so many long drawn out posts from Ditchy, I felt people wouldn't mind me expressing my comments so thoroughly. And for the record while my post may make several references to Ditchy's last post, this is by no means a "pick it apart" post lined with several contradicting quotes.

I think the thing that makes me appreciate Spider man 3 will everyone seems to honestly have given it such an unnecessary harsh cold sholder is the fact that it wraps up so much in one movie. And yet, this is the same reason that this movie worked so well for me, because it took a challenge and went with it.

Sam Raimi is one of the few directors who actually LISTENS to what people say and changes his movies depending on the results of his last film, something many directors tend to never do. I remember how well the first film was and how weird the second one felt considering Dr. Octopus took a back seat to the love story.

Considering the ass load of much worse and more miserably failed attempts to cram butt loads of information into a person's brain kind of movies, Spider Man 3 is probably the best one there is out there. While things may seem rushed, everything is at least SETTLED and no major issues are left dangling over our heads for years to come.

I HATE it when movies let you dangle. Super Mario Bros, Deep Rising, and Godzilla 98 all ended with cliff hanger endings and it sucks big time because you know for years and years there are stories left creeping around and are forever going to be left untold, unfinished, and undone by the fact the door was left open.

Films like Matrix Reloded, Lord of the rings, and Pirates 2: Dead Man's chest ended on similar notes, but at least you knew the money was gonna rank in enough that sequels were inevitably on the way. But with so much jibber jabber amongst Maguire and Dunst leaving, the studios had to prepare for a grand finale.

I'm happy with Spider Man 3, and yes I would have liked to see Venom more but if the series ends now, I'm at least happy he got the chance to come on screen before he possibly vanishes forever along with the rest of the Spider man universe. There was so much involved in this film that those 2 and a half hours blew by in a heartbeat.

I also felt that the first film is in truth, one of the very FEW select movies I consider "perfect". In regards to the whole Goblin's need to battle Spider man, evil never has really needed an excuse. The comics Green Goblin started on very basic principles, trying to become rich and powerful.

I felt his whole "choose your own way" motto was also a clear definition of why Goblin was doing this: because he wanted to. Every Spider man villain in the movies relies on the power of choice what determines who they are, not motives or greed or power, it's all a matter of the choices they make.

That's why I was never bothered with why Goblin fought Spidey, or why Harry flip flopped with being a bad guy or a good guy, they made the choice. In fact when you look at it in the long run, every villain was given the same "gift/curse" that Spider man was given and they all made a choice.

The whole power responsibility thing comes back, and it's because people will choose to be evil that makes them so interesting. The so called "corn" was NOT the movie's fault, in truth, it was everyone's fault. After 9/11 all of America started joining hands and positive reinforcement has popped up in every form and way.

The trash scene along with every shot of Spider man behind the American flag was for positive reinforcement, something that movie people felt we needed, whether we wanted it or not, and I don't blame the movie for that. I also just want to wrap up that the actors really have, in my book, made a difference as they progressed.

Franco in particular, he was a little tame in the first film but he really became the Harry Osborn the comics had created and I thought he especially was impressive returning to his "darker side" when he was messing with Mary Jane and Peter, and their very interesting fight in Harry's mansion with the "booming" climax.

Maguire I love mad props to, more so then Dunst because he made Spider man a geek through and through, something even the amazing 90's series cartoon managed to accomplish. You could tell he was a nerd and a tragic hero at the same time, even when Peter went bad and did all those dark "cool guy" poses and struts.

That to me really sold his portrayal of Parker because in truth: what other kind of dark nature do you expect to see from ma geek? Whew, that's enough of my 2 cents, more like 600 cents by the looks of it .

[jekylljuice]

Originally Posted by Ditchy McAbandonpants

jekylljuice: Wow...you know what, the more I look at Mr. Century, the more I become convinced that Paul Newman might actually work. And hey, from my point of view, it's bound to be better than Spider-Man 3, eh? If you want to see a fairly damning (not to mention incredibly foul-mouthed) analysis of Turny D, check out this profile of him. Amusing pictures abound!

Aww, they weren't exactly very polite about poor Turny D, were they? I bet if they did get Paul Newman to fill his horse-and-buggy shoes he'd get more respect.

As for Spider-Man 3, I won't actually get to see it until two weeks time when I've finished all my essay-work. Despite the mixed press I've been hearing, both here and everywhere else, I'm looking forward to it. It'll be a welcome change to sitting at my desk all day, staring dejectedly at a blank piece of paper.

[Invader Bloo]

Here's how I see the box-office will turn out this year:
U.S.-
1. Spider-Man 3
2. Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire
3. Shrek the Third
4. Pirates of the Carribean: At World's End
5. Transformers
6. Ratouille (Pixar movies are always succesful)
10. The Simpsons Movie
I don't what would be 7-9, but I'm sure Simpsons movie won't be there. Though it will be succesful.

For world-wide it be the same except switch Spidey & Potter, hey it happened in 2005 with Star Wars: Episode III & Goblet of Fire.

Back on Spider-Man, Spoiler Below

Heard Venom really might not of died, if that's true would love for him to get his own movie like Green Goblin & Doc Ock.

I might see it Tuesday.