If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Starpulse)   Why are Columbia excutives so hellbent on destroying the "Spiderman" franchise?   (starpulse.com) divider line 64
    More: Fail, Robert Pattinson, Tobey Maguire, Kirsten Dunst, Zac Efron, High School Musical, Britain's Daily Mirror, alter-ego, Spider-Man  
•       •       •

6880 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 17 Jan 2010 at 6:04 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-01-17 03:28:39 PM
FormlessOne: Norad: Because it's about farking time to move away from comic book movies?

Because what harms a Marvel property harms Disney?

Fano: CK2005: It was ruined when they cast farking Toby McGuire as farking Spiderman. I don't know if they could have picked a worse actor for the role if they tried.

Now, search your heart and you know that's not true. Sad Sack Parker was the role Tobey was born to play. Awkward, sad, but hopeful in the way decent nerds can be, he was a spot on choice. You must have seen some movie after part one and two to think otherwise. DId they make some cartoon or something that Tobey voiced?

/looking forward to Spider-man 3

Actually, I agree - Tobey was, unfortunately, no Peter Parker. Not clever enough by half, not sarcastic enough - just not "sharp" enough. Kirsten Dunst did a reasonable job with Mary Jane, but Tobey Macguire could've done better with Peter Parker.


Exactly. He was just so blah. I don't have anything against Macguire, I just didn't like him as Spiderman. I guess it's more forgivable than casting Topher Grace as Venom. That just didn't work by any stretch of the imagination.
 
2010-01-17 03:33:55 PM
www.samruby.com
 
2010-01-17 03:47:45 PM
Frankly, I'd rather see the wheels starting turning on Captain America.

Oh, and The Flash(I know, I know, DC, different universe...).
 
2010-01-17 06:30:50 PM
bob_ross: I guarantee Subby would still go see it if they gave the part to Vanilla Ice. Do you know the kind of shiat storm fans would send through Hollywood if they just stopped going to lame movies?

but... but.. but... etc.. etc..


Doubtful. I get the feeling that this could be the new millennium Batman and Robin.
 
2010-01-17 06:57:44 PM
Actually, I agree - Tobey was, unfortunately, no Peter Parker. Not clever enough by half, not sarcastic enough - just not "sharp" enough. Kirsten Dunst did a reasonable job with Mary Jane, but Tobey Macguire could've done better with Peter Parker.

Agree. Spiderman is a smart-ass and he's funny. His sarcastic wit is one of the main qualities that make the character so appealing - both in comics and in animation. But Tobey Macguire's Spiderman is not a smart-ass and he's not funny and although I enjoyed Spiderman I and II, the absence of these qualities in the Macguire's Spiderman was disappointing. However, I don't completely blame Macquire for this as I imagine it would have been very difficult for him to be a smart-ass/funny if it's just not written in the script.
 
2010-01-17 07:41:51 PM
I loved the first two Spider Man movies, but they are not kid flicks and Spider Man has a HUGE kid appeal. I think they're rebooting it to aim it at a much younger audience which is smart business. To be clear though, I would personally have much rather seen them let Rami continue with his vision because no doubt it would have been excellent if the suits had left him alone.
 
2010-01-17 10:24:39 PM
browneye: Actually, I agree - Tobey was, unfortunately, no Peter Parker. Not clever enough by half, not sarcastic enough - just not "sharp" enough. Kirsten Dunst did a reasonable job with Mary Jane, but Tobey Macguire could've done better with Peter Parker.

Agree. Spiderman is a smart-ass and he's funny. His sarcastic wit is one of the main qualities that make the character so appealing - both in comics and in animation. But Tobey Macguire's Spiderman is not a smart-ass and he's not funny and although I enjoyed Spiderman I and II, the absence of these qualities in the Macguire's Spiderman was disappointing. However, I don't completely blame Macquire for this as I imagine it would have been very difficult for him to be a smart-ass/funny if it's just not written in the script.


The problem was with Raimi/Tapert/Raimi's writing. Sam, Rob, and Ted apparently didn't remember much of Spider-Man from their youth, and so they just sort of hit on the major points. At least that's how it seemed.

I love Sam Raimi's work, but sometimes he misses and he missed HARD. They made a huge mistake in working out the scripts themselves, instead of hiring someone from the comics field to do it for them. Even Stan Lee could have written a better, less cheesy story than Spider-Man 3.

Tobey sucked. I never liked him as Spider-Man because he really didn't have any of Pete's qualities. I give credit to him for working out and looking decent in the costume, but whether it was his choice or the executives' choice, it was DUMB to have him remove his mask so often, because his head looks awful in that costume. He's not a pretty man. Peter Parker is actually supposed to be "kinda cute."

Kiki Dunst sucked as MJ. It's like she didn't even TRY to learn about the character. She really just played herself. I guess that's forgivable, though, as MJ is a shallow, useless, two-dimensional character who never should have been pushed up to leading lady status in the comics OR in the movies. There was just this stupid pressure to make MJ the Spider-Man equivalent of Lois Lane, and frankly, I think it was misguided.

I would love to see Disney/Marvel get the movie rights back, and then incorporate Spider-Man into their Marvel Movie Universe, starting him at 16 years of age (which is how old he was when he became Spider-Man in the comics). Follow the basic outline of Ultimate Spider-Man, but use villains based more on the 616 versions. Keep MJ out of it for a LONG time; Have Pete date a bunch of girls when he gets a little older, but leave MJ on the back burner. Make Gwen the major leading lady for a while, and then kill her off in a later installment.

And finally: DON'T KILL THE FARKING ARCH-VILLAIN IN THE FIRST MOVIE!!!

I swear, Hollywood does this with every comic book hero. They kill the arch-enemy in their first encounter. If Hollywood had their way, Sherlock Holmes would meet Moriarty for the first time on Monday, and the evil professor would be dead by tea time on Thursday.

Draw it out. Let the villain GET AWAY, or be arrested. Don't kill him off. Shiat... Didn't Hollywood learn anything from Star Trek? Leaving Khan stranded on a planet was the set-up for one of the best sci-fi movies, ever. Making the Borg so indestructible is what made them so menacing for most of a series, and a couple films.

Do not kill the arch-enemy!

However, since Columbia & Sony are in control of Spider-Man, what's going to happen is they're going to "re-imagine" him for the Twilight crowd, and for all the little twerps who only know Spider-Man from the animated show and movies. They'll focus on the drama at school and some lame romance, and the villain will probably end up being Morbius so they can get a vampire in there somewhere... Only he'll be a young, hip, handsome, leather-wearing Morbius, and he'll steal Pete's girlfriend.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF-
 
2010-01-18 03:30:43 AM
Swampthing in Korea: In defense of Patterson, he only signed onto Twilight because he wanted to work with the main actress, whom he respected.

He apparantly has criticize Twilight and the character of Edward a lot.


I heard the same thing, if you replace "main actress" with "boatloads of money."

To be fair, the "main actress" didn't want the job either, until her agent smacked her on the head and said "10% says you're doing this gorram film!"

At least Pattison has come out and criticized Stephanie Meyer's work directly. It won't make me go out and watch him as Spider-Man -- in fact, him taking over the role will probably make me commit random acts of terrorism -- but I can still appreciate that he's slightly more intelligent than his core fanbase.
 
2010-01-18 08:12:33 AM
Robert Pattinson makes me feel like a child molester. I would do things to that boy that would make his momma slap me.

/Now, what were we talking about?
 
2010-01-18 01:55:03 PM
As I said in another thread...

rogue49: Speaking of swimsuit beauties,
I just figured out a way to get Spidey back on original course...

Make Mary Jane a super-heroine.
Give her a power that can survive the onslaught of villians.
(this will help whether or not you want to keep the identity known or not)

Kill of Aunt May, allow a very old woman the dignity of death.

Now the guy can have a "normal" life, the continuity is preserved,
and he doesn't have to constantly worry about his "loved-ones"

That and you can have MJ in some VERY nice looking outfits.

/bonus...spiderman can get out of the rut of constantly unsuccessful


this would translate over to the movies well too.
 
2010-01-18 02:14:34 PM
ZeroCorpse: browneye: Actually, I agree - Tobey was, unfortunately, no Peter Parker. Not clever enough by half, not sarcastic enough - just not "sharp" enough. Kirsten Dunst did a reasonable job with Mary Jane, but Tobey Macguire could've done better with Peter Parker.

Agree. Spiderman is a smart-ass and he's funny. His sarcastic wit is one of the main qualities that make the character so appealing - both in comics and in animation. But Tobey Macguire's Spiderman is not a smart-ass and he's not funny and although I enjoyed Spiderman I and II, the absence of these qualities in the Macguire's Spiderman was disappointing. However, I don't completely blame Macquire for this as I imagine it would have been very difficult for him to be a smart-ass/funny if it's just not written in the script.

The problem was with Raimi/Tapert/Raimi's writing. Sam, Rob, and Ted apparently didn't remember much of Spider-Man from their youth, and so they just sort of hit on the major points. At least that's how it seemed.

I love Sam Raimi's work, but sometimes he misses and he missed HARD. They made a huge mistake in working out the scripts themselves, instead of hiring someone from the comics field to do it for them. Even Stan Lee could have written a better, less cheesy story than Spider-Man 3.

Tobey sucked. I never liked him as Spider-Man because he really didn't have any of Pete's qualities. I give credit to him for working out and looking decent in the costume, but whether it was his choice or the executives' choice, it was DUMB to have him remove his mask so often, because his head looks awful in that costume. He's not a pretty man. Peter Parker is actually supposed to be "kinda cute."

Kiki Dunst sucked as MJ. It's like she didn't even TRY to learn about the character. She really just played herself. I guess that's forgivable, though, as MJ is a shallow, useless, two-dimensional character who never should have been pushed up to leading lady status in the comics OR in the movies. There was just this stupid pressure to make MJ the Spider-Man equivalent of Lois Lane, and frankly, I think it was misguided.

I would love to see Disney/Marvel get the movie rights back, and then incorporate Spider-Man into their Marvel Movie Universe, starting him at 16 years of age (which is how old he was when he became Spider-Man in the comics). Follow the basic outline of Ultimate Spider-Man, but use villains based more on the 616 versions. Keep MJ out of it for a LONG time; Have Pete date a bunch of girls when he gets a little older, but leave MJ on the back burner. Make Gwen the major leading lady for a while, and then kill her off in a later installment.

And finally: DON'T KILL THE FARKING ARCH-VILLAIN IN THE FIRST MOVIE!!!

I swear, Hollywood does this with every comic book hero. They kill the arch-enemy in their first encounter. If Hollywood had their way, Sherlock Holmes would meet Moriarty for the first time on Monday, and the evil professor would be dead by tea time on Thursday.

Draw it out. Let the villain GET AWAY, or be arrested. Don't kill him off. Shiat... Didn't Hollywood learn anything from Star Trek? Leaving Khan stranded on a planet was the set-up for one of the best sci-fi movies, ever. Making the Borg so indestructible is what made them so menacing for most of a series, and a couple films.

Do not kill the arch-enemy!

However, since Columbia & Sony are in control of Spider-Man, what's going to happen is they're going to "re-imagine" him for the Twilight crowd, and for all the little twerps who only know Spider-Man from the animated show and movies. They'll focus on the drama at school and some lame romance, and the villain will probably end up being Morbius so they can get a vampire in there somewhere... Only he'll be a young, hip, handsome, leather-wearing Morbius, and he'll steal Pete's girlfriend.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF-


That's one of the things I liked about the X-Men movies -- they never killed off Magneto. They had him defeated, captured, but never killed, so they could use him again in the next one.

I think that Nolan was trying to do that with The Dark Knight, so he could use The Joker again, but then... well, Ledger.
 
2010-01-18 02:24:30 PM
HeartBurnKid: ZeroCorpse: browneye:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF-

That's one of the things I liked about the X-Men movies -- they never killed off Magneto. They had him defeated, captured, but never killed, so they could use him again in the next one.

I think that Nolan was ...


And you know what's weird? Jason, Freddy, Michael Myers, jeez, tons of villains in movies survive for the next movie. I realize that audiences want closure - but dropping the archvillain off a building, then having the building collapse on him, then have the Munchkin mayor come out to declare him demonstratably, certifiably dead?

WHY oh WHY would you kill your arch-nemesis on during your origin story? That's supposed to be a Sinestro, or a Lex Luthor, or a One Armed Man! The guy you hunt your entire career!
 
2010-01-18 03:08:21 PM
ZeroCorpse: The problem was with Raimi/Tapert/Raimi's writing. Sam, Rob, and Ted apparently didn't remember much of Spider-Man from their youth, and so they just sort of hit on the major points. At least that's how it seemed.

I love Sam Raimi's work, but sometimes he misses and he missed HARD. They made a huge mistake in working out the scripts themselves, instead of hiring someone from the comics field to do it for them. Even Stan Lee could have written a better, less cheesy story than Spider-Man 3.


I think part of the problem is Sony shoving Venom down Raimi's throat. Raimi absolutely hates Venom. Casting Topher Grace had to be payback for that decision.

But yes, leave MJ on the backburner for a long while this time. Please?
 
2010-01-18 10:37:16 PM
Never watched any part of Twilight so I have no idea if this kid can act or would fit the part.

However the thing that I find odd is that they keep mentioning that they want to take Spidey back to High School. I cant be the only one who thinks that Tobey McGuire looks more like a kid than Pattinson.

The article mentions considering Zach Efron. While that makes me shudder in revulsion (my daughter was the target age during the High School Musical craze) he does at least look more the part.
 
Displayed 14 of 64 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report