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.

(ABC)   "Noah" director responds to critics about the film's accuracy, grudgingly agrees to remove the Royal Caribbean life preserver   (abcnews.go.com) divider line 89
    More: Followup, silver screen, epic film  
•       •       •

2315 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 30 Mar 2014 at 12:12 PM (25 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



89 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-30 03:55:46 AM
The loaded animals 2x2, right?

Oh wait, Xtians that would watch that schlock wouldn't know that's wrong anyway.
 
2014-03-30 04:12:08 AM
"Biblical accuracy."

www.getacopywriter.com
 
2014-03-30 05:10:58 AM
movie started out good, then got better, but fell on its face during the last hour and was a bore to watch.

I rank movies as:

Gotta see it in Imax
Gotta see it on a big screen
Gotta own it on Blu-Ray
Gonna rent it from Red Box
Will watch it on HBO
Will watch it on Netflix
Might catch it someday
Too stupid to care.


I wanted this to be a "gotta own it on blu-ray".  I was "too stupid to care"
 
2014-03-30 07:23:31 AM
I plan to see it this evening. If the American Taliban is not happy, maybe there is something worth seeing.
 
2014-03-30 08:56:51 AM
Accuracy?

/I do not think it means what you think it means
 
2014-03-30 09:51:13 AM

clancifer: I plan to see it this evening. If the American Taliban is not happy, maybe there is something worth seeing.


It isn't that the taliban aren't happy, its that it is a stupid movie.

Honestly....if you want to see a good flick that will not leave you wishing you had your two hours back, see Divergent or the Lego Movie.

/the only thing it has in common with the bible are the names, the boat, and lotsa water
 
2014-03-30 11:47:54 AM
It would have been Carnival, but the film ark accommodations were far too roomy, luxurious and clean to be believable
 
2014-03-30 12:20:49 PM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: It would have been Carnival, but the film ark accommodations were far too roomy, luxurious and clean to be believable


Also less poop in the Ark than in the typical meal on Carnival.
 
2014-03-30 12:20:58 PM
I live smack dab in the middle of the Bible belt.
I have friends on Facebook that are 'boycotting' the movie because it's not 'true' to the Bible.
 Oh, and  the director,Darren Aronofsky, is an Atheist.
 I give up.
 
2014-03-30 12:21:19 PM
We should all ask Larry King if it was accurate. After all, he was just a lad in those times....
 
2014-03-30 12:21:58 PM
 
2014-03-30 12:30:04 PM
Accurate to a thousands-year-old myth.

Right.
 
2014-03-30 12:31:15 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2014-03-30 12:34:18 PM
Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.
 
2014-03-30 12:44:09 PM

FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.


Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).
 
2014-03-30 12:53:29 PM
Accurate about a made up event? These people complained about Tom Bombadil not being in Lord of the Rings too, didn't they.
 
2014-03-30 12:55:35 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: Accurate about a made up event? These people complained about Tom Bombadil not being in Lord of the Rings too, didn't they.


And complained about Superman having a textured suit.
 
2014-03-30 12:55:48 PM

SauronWasFramed: clancifer: I plan to see it this evening. If the American Taliban is not happy, maybe there is something worth seeing.

It isn't that the taliban aren't happy, its that it is a stupid movie.

Honestly....if you want to see a good flick that will not leave you wishing you had your two hours back, see Divergent or the Lego Movie.

/the only thing it has in common with the bible are the names, the boat, and lotsa water


Divergent has 40% on Rotten Tomatoes: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/divergent/.
 
2014-03-30 12:57:32 PM

FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.


You could make a movie that was a word for word retelling of a bible story that the Evangelicals would boycott.  Just choose one of the ghastly stories that they have never read.
 
2014-03-30 01:02:02 PM

B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).


B/c LOTR and comic book fans don't ban your movie from countries or issue fatwas. Although Battfleck could change all that.
 
2014-03-30 01:02:23 PM

B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).


I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.
 
2014-03-30 01:08:44 PM

FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.


Isn't this how one would describe evangelicals? Are they not a loud minority of Christianity?
 
2014-03-30 01:16:03 PM
That's because works of fiction will alway be open to interpretation.
 
2014-03-30 01:18:23 PM
A fictional retelling of a fictional tale.

But then, as pointed out, Tolkien obsessives are all in knots over adding a  girl  to their stories, so...
 
2014-03-30 01:19:19 PM
Did he do the "two of each" or the seven of each clean animals" version? Did Noah say "... right" at any point?
 
2014-03-30 01:25:41 PM

Cymbal: That's because works of fiction will alway be open to interpretation.


Nix Nightbird: A fictional retelling of a fictional tale.

But then, as pointed out, Tolkien obsessives are all in knots over adding a  girl  to their stories, so...


You know, as someone who is personally an atheist but has actually known Christians and actually knows how they think, I can tell you that pointing out over and over that it's fiction means nothing to them. You don't understand the mindset: myth and reality are blended together for them. It will always be "real" to them, even if it's not actually real.
 
2014-03-30 01:25:49 PM

Nix Nightbird: A fictional retelling of a fictional tale.

But then, as pointed out, Tolkien obsessives are all in knots over adding a  girl  to their stories, so...


Fictional?! Don't you remember how you felt when they found Noah's ark??

http://www.salon.com/2014/03/19/fox_n ews_host_apparently_thinks_noahs _ ark_was_discovered_is_real/
 
2014-03-30 01:26:49 PM

SauronWasFramed: movie started out good, then got better, but fell on its face during the last hour and was a bore to watch.

I rank movies as:

Gotta see it in Imax
Gotta see it on a big screen
Gotta own it on Blu-Ray
Gonna rent it from Red Box
Will watch it on HBO
Will watch it on Netflix
Might catch it someday
Too stupid to care.


I wanted this to be a "gotta own it on blu-ray".  I was "too stupid to care"


I was hoping this would at least be Cecil B. DeMille "Ten Commandments" fun.
 
2014-03-30 01:28:49 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Accurate to a thousands-year-old myth.

Right.


It actually sounds like it kind of is, it seems to have added back in a lot of the context of Jewish mythology from before they became monotheistic and the early Christian revisions from when they were modifying the mythology instead of just discarding it entirely.  Nephilim and so on everywhere.  So it's likely much closer to the original/older stories than the modern Bible version.

I haven't seen it though.

Tyrone Slothrop: Divergent has 40% on Rotten Tomatoes: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/divergent/.


Given that the only entertaining thing about the book was how some of the ghost writers were trying to rebel and write an actual dark/dystopian set of themes in, and the other ghostwriters struggling vainly to put things back on track, it doesn't surprise me that it didn't translate well into a movie.
 
2014-03-30 01:38:32 PM
Jim_Callahan: HotIgneous Intruder: Accurate to a thousands-year-old myth.

Right.

It actually sounds like it kind of is, it seems to have added back in a lot of the context of Jewish mythology from before they became monotheistic and the early Christian revisions from when they were modifying the mythology instead of just discarding it entirely.  Nephilim and so on everywhere.  So it's likely much closer to the original/older stories than the modern Bible version.


Actually, the Nephilim part is in one of the Bible versions of the story.
 
2014-03-30 01:44:56 PM
When I was a kid, the story of Noah was by far the coolest bible story out there.

Now that I'm an adult, I find that the story of Noah and the Ark is an infallible litmus test for stupidity.  Any adult who actually believes that 2 of every animal were put onto a boat buy one guy and his family while the entire planet flooded is a complete moron.
 
2014-03-30 01:48:02 PM

Trocadero: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

B/c LOTR and comic book fans don't ban your movie from countries or issue fatwas. Although Battfleck could change all that.


You sound retarded.
 
2014-03-30 01:57:15 PM

FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.


Gwen Stacy was the dealbreaker for me. Found out she was was not in the movies as a major character development point for Spiderman, and that was it.  I haven't seen more than half of the first one with Tobey(can't act)McGuire.
 
2014-03-30 02:06:14 PM
Voooobah Voooobah *ding*   NOAH
 
2014-03-30 02:07:31 PM

InterruptingQuirk: Gwen Stacy was the dealbreaker for me. Found out she was was not in the movies as a major character development point for Spiderman, and that was it.  I haven't seen more than half of the first one with Tobey(can't act)McGuire.


Well, if not having Gwen Stacy was the problem, you certainly don't have to tell us you haven't seen the Andrew Garfield Spiderman, since that point's rather evident, at least.

/Translation from harsh sarcastic internet post speak: "Try the new reboot if you want to see Gwen."
 
2014-03-30 02:08:35 PM

anniesmom: I live smack dab in the middle of the Bible belt.
I have friends on Facebook that are 'boycotting' the movie because it's not 'true' to the Bible.
 Oh, and  the director,Darren Aronofsky, is an Atheist.
 I give up.


You'd be extra surprised at the amount of complaints about an Al Jazeera ad playing before the movie. Supporting terrorism, etc.
 
2014-03-30 02:14:15 PM

B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.

Isn't this how one would describe evangelicals? Are they not a loud minority of Christianity?


they are, but these movies are being catered specifically to them; you'll get some general Christians as well, but that's more of a bonus than an intention. No one is catering specifically to diehard comic book or LOTR fans because it is a losing proposition on multiple levels.
 
2014-03-30 02:18:36 PM

Nix Nightbird: A fictional retelling of a fictional tale.

But then, as pointed out, Tolkien obsessives are all in knots over adding a  girl  to their stories, so...


Adding an original character was annoying, but it could have been dismissed.  It was Jackson adding a love story that is worse than Twilight that is pissing all the fans off.  When you start adding crap that's worse than Twilight to a movie based on a damn good book the vocal outcries from fans shouldn't be surprising.  The fact that Smaug's head looks nearly exactly like Godzilla's from that crappy 1998 Godzilla movie also didn't help, nor did, well, a good chunk of the 'original' writing that got added.

/did like the YouTube video of the goldsmith showing what actual liquid gold looks like though
 
2014-03-30 02:26:54 PM

FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.


I think the other big difference is that even the vocal minority of comic book fans will still go see the movie. In the end, that's all Hollywood cares about.
 
2014-03-30 02:28:37 PM

FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: B.L.Z. Bub: FeedTheCollapse: Evangelicals, this is why Hollywood doesn't cater to your market: You nitpick over every goddamn thing and are generally a pain in the ass to please.

Um...Then how do you explain all the comic book and fantasy movies? If you're gonna tell me that LOTR fans aren't a pain in the ass to please, I'll have to say you're wrong (and I am one).

I thought of them as soon as I posted that. Honestly, barring an undeniably shiat movie (think: X3 and Spiderman 3), I'd say comic book geeks who flip out over changes to their stories are a (vocal) minority. Some changes are more controversial than others, but I'd say that most can at least recognise that a movie is not a comic book and some changes might be somewhat necessary to keep the plot working in a different medium.  I know LOTR fans have some issues with the movies, but I've seen relatively few who completely write off the movies because of them (though The Hobbit is a bit of a different beast, in that regard.)

Evangelicals? Always and forever biatching. fark them.

Isn't this how one would describe evangelicals? Are they not a loud minority of Christianity?

they are, but these movies are being catered specifically to them; you'll get some general Christians as well, but that's more of a bonus than an intention. No one is catering specifically to diehard comic book or LOTR fans because it is a losing proposition on multiple levels.


Are they though? The marketing for this movie doesn't exactly scream fundamentalism to me.

Dalek Caan's doomed mistress: Adding an original character was annoying, but it could have been dismissed.  It was Jackson adding a love story that is worse than Twilight that is pissing all the fans off.


Exactly this.
 
2014-03-30 02:35:32 PM

SauronWasFramed: movie started out good, then got better, but fell on its face during the last hour and was a bore to watch.



I felt just the opposite - unnecessary and redundant exposition for the first 30-45 minutes (which is revisited later in the movie in a superior fashion), followed by well-choreographed but derivative battle scenes borrowed from "300", but then turns into an actual drama about free will. Not the best Biblical epic ever, but not as cheesy as I thought it would be, plus Aronofsky always gets good performances out of his actors. I'd also say that the production team did more research than people gave them credit for - such as including the Grigori and fleshing out additional characters - but that they put their own spin on it.

In my view, a trippy but interesting take on the Genesis story that, as others have pointed out, doesn't have a lot of meat in it in the first place, allowing for creative interpretations. Russell Crowe's Noah is a lot more interesting than the original character, and the motives and characters of Ham and the other family members are explored in much more detail than in any other adaptation. In my view, they could have cut the first 30 minutes and it would have been a better movie. I'd say worth admission, but go ahead and show up late, you won't miss much.
 
2014-03-30 02:45:43 PM

Tyrone Slothrop: SauronWasFramed: clancifer: I plan to see it this evening. If the American Taliban is not happy, maybe there is something worth seeing.

It isn't that the taliban aren't happy, its that it is a stupid movie.

Honestly....if you want to see a good flick that will not leave you wishing you had your two hours back, see Divergent or the Lego Movie.

/the only thing it has in common with the bible are the names, the boat, and lotsa water

Divergent has 40% on Rotten Tomatoes: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/divergent/.


That surprises me, considering Divergent is basically Hunger Games - The Next Generation
 
2014-03-30 02:50:29 PM

SauronWasFramed: clancifer: I plan to see it this evening. If the American Taliban is not happy, maybe there is something worth seeing.

It isn't that the taliban aren't happy, its that it is a stupid movie.

Honestly....if you want to see a good flick that will not leave you wishing you had your two hours back, see Divergent or the Lego Movie.

/the only thing it has in common with the bible are the names, the boat, and lotsa water


Divergent????!!!!????
Spoiler Alert:
Why, WHY, did they run at the end?????!!!!??? It was over except for like six bad guys. They stopped it, killed nearly all the villains then farking left!!! Jebus!!! Aweful aweful aweful. No powers no special skills nothing. "I think for myself." Really? Everyone I know does that. I rolled my eyes so farking hard I saw the inside of the back of my skull. The worst 8 bucks I have ever spent. And it was double featured with the new 300 which I kind of liked but still worst eight bucks because Divergent was soooooooo bad.
 
2014-03-30 02:51:06 PM
I guess you can put me down as undecided.
 
2014-03-30 02:52:52 PM

Hollie Maea: Jim_Callahan: HotIgneous Intruder: Accurate to a thousands-year-old myth.

Right.

It actually sounds like it kind of is, it seems to have added back in a lot of the context of Jewish mythology from before they became monotheistic and the early Christian revisions from when they were modifying the mythology instead of just discarding it entirely.  Nephilim and so on everywhere.  So it's likely much closer to the original/older stories than the modern Bible version.

Actually, the Nephilim part is in one of the Bible versions of the story.


You and I knew this shiat before it was cool.
 
2014-03-30 02:53:02 PM

B.L.Z. Bub: Cymbal: That's because works of fiction will alway be open to interpretation.

Nix Nightbird: A fictional retelling of a fictional tale.

But then, as pointed out, Tolkien obsessives are all in knots over adding a  girl  to their stories, so...

You know, as someone who is personally an atheist but has actually known Christians and actually knows how they think, I can tell you that pointing out over and over that it's fiction means nothing to them. You don't understand the mindset: myth and reality are blended together for them. It will always be "real" to them, even if it's not actually real.


wanna really drive christians up a wall?  point out that the bible only goes back maybe 3000 years...but pagan texts on the bible go back almost 7000 years.  4000 years older than the most ancient version of judeao-christian documentation in existence.   if age of the origin source is to be considered the only criteria for validity than pagan views on the universe and gods are more valid than the christian ideology.
 
2014-03-30 02:54:58 PM

firesign: InterruptingQuirk: Gwen Stacy was the dealbreaker for me. Found out she was was not in the movies as a major character development point for Spiderman, and that was it.  I haven't seen more than half of the first one with Tobey(can't act)McGuire.

Well, if not having Gwen Stacy was the problem, you certainly don't have to tell us you haven't seen the Andrew Garfield Spiderman, since that point's rather evident, at least.

/Translation from harsh sarcastic internet post speak: "Try the new reboot if you want to see Gwen."


It's nice to hear that they are finally acknowledging Gwen, but! Does she die? and does Spiderman have to choose between saving her and saving Aunt May? Because if she doesn't die and Spiderman doesn't have to make that choice, then it's just a character with her name IMHO.
 
2014-03-30 03:05:46 PM
Its not that he retold a "fictional tale" in a different way. Its that he took a BELOVED tale that has been around for millennia that means a lot to a lot of people and changed it to the point where it was more or less unrecognizable.

Did he really need to add rock monsters?

Seriously. LOTR was not remade as a rollicking space comedy. It was largely very faithful to the book. At least it tried to be true to the source material.  But NOAH totally makes up about 2/3 of the movie and not in a way that is true to the source material.

I am not a devout Christian, but I would have liked to see a true biblical epic done with care and respect the way that the 10 Commandments was done.

At the very least, they lacked respect.
 
2014-03-30 03:10:17 PM

Por que tan serioso: Hollie Maea: Jim_Callahan: HotIgneous Intruder: Accurate to a thousands-year-old myth.

Right.

It actually sounds like it kind of is, it seems to have added back in a lot of the context of Jewish mythology from before they became monotheistic and the early Christian revisions from when they were modifying the mythology instead of just discarding it entirely.  Nephilim and so on everywhere.  So it's likely much closer to the original/older stories than the modern Bible version.

Actually, the Nephilim part is in one of the Bible versions of the story.

You and I knew this shiat before it was cool.


If you want some great young adult fiction dealing with that, then look at the book 'Many Waters' by Madeline L'Engle or for more adult reading look at 'Noah' by Ellen Gunderson Traylor. Traylor's book is a great fictional fleshing out of that antediluvian period, with some wild ideas about what that world was like taken from many extra-biblical sources of myth and legend.
 
2014-03-30 03:11:51 PM

firesign: InterruptingQuirk: Gwen Stacy was the dealbreaker for me. Found out she was was not in the movies as a major character development point for Spiderman, and that was it.  I haven't seen more than half of the first one with Tobey(can't act)McGuire.

Well, if not having Gwen Stacy was the problem, you certainly don't have to tell us you haven't seen the Andrew Garfield Spiderman, since that point's rather evident, at least.

/Translation from harsh sarcastic internet post speak: "Try the new reboot if you want to see Gwen."


I really liked the Amazing Spider-Man, mainly because I found Garfield a better Spidey than McGuire because he brought out a lot more of the smart ass in Peter Parker. Plus, I just don't like McGuire that much as an actor, mainly because of that perpetually stupid look he has on his face (he was by far the weakest part of the recent version of The Great Gatsby). I can forgive them rebooting Spider-Man soon soon because they had to fix a lot of the damage the Raimi versions did to the story by brining in Mary Jane too early and screwing up Venom. That said, Spider-Man 2 did turn out really well, but it was just hard to go forward with where the first trilogy left things.
 
Displayed 50 of 89 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report