Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(SlashFilm)   Alternate deleted ending of Amazing Spider-Man 2 might have made the movie more coherent. Or less. Who even knows what was going on by that time?   (slashfilm.com) divider line 43
    More: Silly  
•       •       •

2826 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 04 Aug 2014 at 11:14 PM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-04 07:45:35 PM  
Amazing Spider-Man 2 is one of those movies that is perfect for multitasking. I can watch a scene and be mildly entertained, then go back to whatever else I was doing while a bunch of stuff I don't care about happens in the background, and then in a bit I can watch another scene and be mildly entertained. Lather, rinse, repeat.
 
2014-08-04 11:32:19 PM  
This would be an easy prologue for a third movie.
 
2014-08-04 11:45:03 PM  
This would have actually managed to make the movie worse.
 
2014-08-04 11:50:30 PM  

Confabulat: Amazing Spider-Man 2 is one of those movies that is perfect for multitasking. I can watch a scene and be mildly entertained, then go back to whatever else I was doing while a bunch of stuff I don't care about happens in the background, and then in a bit I can watch another scene and be mildly entertained. Lather, rinse, repeat.


Suitable for children with short attention spans, then?
 
2014-08-05 12:02:59 AM  
If your writers can't firmly establish a conclusion of the story, then maybe that story is farking horrible to begin with.
 
2014-08-05 12:54:00 AM  
 
2014-08-05 02:15:43 AM  
What really would have helped AS2 is if the lead had memorized his lines for each scene, instead of just trying to fake his way through most of them by stammering out a bunch of awkward "Ummm"s and "Whaa..?"s. Or maybe the director wanted to copy the magic of the romantic dialogue from Twilight and Attack of the Clones, but Emma Stone didn't get the note?
 
2014-08-05 04:50:54 AM  
Well, it all makes sense once you read the Bing-translated notes that accompany the clip: "the deleted scene from the ananin in the amazing spiderman 2 in which it appears dad peter who serious my BluRay "
 
2014-08-05 07:36:15 AM  

EdgeRunner: What really would have helped AS2 is if the lead had memorized his lines for each scene, instead of just trying to fake his way through most of them by stammering out a bunch of awkward "Ummm"s and "Whaa..?"s. Or maybe the director wanted to copy the magic of the romantic dialogue from Twilight and Attack of the Clones, but Emma Stone didn't get the note?


Seriously, it's like he was channeling Shia LeBoeuf.
 
2014-08-05 07:39:00 AM  
I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.
 
2014-08-05 07:49:47 AM  

thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.


When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.
 
2014-08-05 08:06:44 AM  

Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.


I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all
 
2014-08-05 08:13:04 AM  

Confabulat: Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.


No, maaan his blood wasn't compatible or whatever that means!
 
2014-08-05 08:23:38 AM  
You know, if you guys stopped watching crummy movies with the "oh I just want to turn my brain off for two hours" excuse, Hollywood would probably spend a little more time refining their big tentpole movies. Even with the bad reviews and bad word of mouth, ASM2 still made over 200 million domestically.

At some point, we probably should start punishing Hollywood for bad movies instead of rewarding it.
 
2014-08-05 08:50:59 AM  
This movie made no sense. Thanks for making me hate my favorie super hero, Sony
 
2014-08-05 09:14:47 AM  
Doesn't matter what was going on. That movie was a big gob of shiat.
 
2014-08-05 09:42:07 AM  
Never have I been gladder not to be a fan of Spider Man.
 
2014-08-05 10:20:19 AM  
i1182.photobucket.com

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.
 
2014-08-05 10:28:51 AM  

Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.


Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.
 
2014-08-05 10:39:28 AM  

texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.


Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1
 
2014-08-05 10:46:09 AM  

moothemagiccow: texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.

Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1


Those are fighting words.
 
2014-08-05 10:58:55 AM  

moothemagiccow: texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.

Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1


And I thought I'd have to be on the Politics tab to see a statement this wrong. (And if you're trolling, 10/10. Very nice.)

Captain America, The Avengers, Winter Soldier, and The Guardians of the Galaxy are fantastic films, in many ways surpassing Iron Man. Both Thor films are quite entertaining, and even Iron Man 3 has a lot going for it. And while Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2 are the weakest of the bunch, they are still better than most comic book movies and both have a few good moments.

For Avengers 3, I'd love to see some crossover action with Spiderman and Wolverine. I'm sure the studios realize the kind of money they could make if they work together and cross promote. It would be SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY for a lot of people.
 
2014-08-05 11:05:14 AM  

texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.


You think they haven't tried?

The deal Marvel Comics made with Sony back when Marvel was on the edge of bankruptcy was for Sony to have the film rights to Spider-Man and associated characters "in perpetuity", or until Sony went such-and-such number of years without making a film based on those characters, as a whole.

It's the "in perpetuity" part of the contract that bites them in the ass. Sony can milk Spider-Man for decades. That's a lot of money... Way more over the long-term than Disney is able to throw at them in the short-term.

AFAIK, Marvel/Disney has also offered deals where Sony still gets a piece of the pie on Spidey films, but Marvel Studios would own the film rights again, and this was turned down because Sony's convinced that over the next several decades they can earn more with constant reboots, re-imaginings, sequels, and all the associated merchandising.

We just have to cope with it: There is no Spider-Man in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and there probably never will be one.

Spidey lives on in the MCU in spirit, in a way, through Tony Stark. The 616 Tony was not quite the jokey, snarky guy we see in the movies-- That's some of Spider-Man's schtick mixed with Stark's personality.

You won't ever see mutants for the same reasons. When Marvel was desperate, they agreed to some really shiatty contracts.
 
2014-08-05 11:16:56 AM  

soporific: For Avengers 3, I'd love to see some crossover action with Spiderman and Wolverine. I'm sure the studios realize the kind of money they could make if they work together and cross promote. It would be SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY for a lot of people.


THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

If they do this, then the MCU has to accept the history and stories told about Sony-Spidey and the FoX-Men as MCU canon. This runs directly counter to the history of the world they established in the MCU movies.

Do you REALLY want that shiatty, convoluted, awful X-Men movie history, political environment, and all the big events that happened in the X-Men movies to be canon for the MCU? It contradicts all the statements in the MCU about people with powers being a newer phenomenon, for one thing. It undermines the Avengers debut and the way the public reacts to it (because there were X-Men doing stuff like that in public in the 90s). It makes Thor's arrival less important. It makes Captain America no big deal, because now the world would be full of people with super powers, and under these conditions it has been since before Cap was created.

This works in the comic continuity because these histories were written together, by the same groups of people, with the same editors. It would not work to shoehorn in the Fox X-Men history of the world with the MCU history of the world. They're not compatible. They actively contradict each other, in fact.

And this isn't even considering the fact that we'd have two versions of Quicksilver in one universe.

I absolutely DO NOT want any of Singer's crap ideas to be part of the MCU.

As for Sony Spider-Man... Well, if we decide it's the current version (and not the Raimi version) that gets mixed into the MCU, there's still too much about his world's history that contradicts what we know about the MCU's history. On top of that, I personally HATE Sony's version of Spider-Man, and I'm saying that as someone who has been reading every Spidey title since 1977 (and back-issues of everything before that). Peter Parker is my role model from way back, but the Sony version is a complete douchebag jerk who I've come to loathe. I shouldn't hate the hero, but Sony found a way to make that happen. It's doubly remarkable that they made it possible for me to hate the one hero I've always loved above all others.

So no... I don't want that douchebro version of Peter Parker from Sony's shiatty movies, or the awful Green Goblin, or the terrible other villains, to be part of the MCU in any way, shape, or form. They don't fit. They don't belong. They're nowhere near what they should be. They're Sony's re-imagining of all those characters, and they flat-out SUCK.
 
2014-08-05 11:17:37 AM  

soporific: moothemagiccow: texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.

Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1

And I thought I'd have to be on the Politics tab to see a statement this wrong. (And if you're trolling, 10/10. Very nice.)

Captain America, The Avengers, Winter Soldier, and The Guardians of the Galaxy are fantastic films, in many ways surpassing Iron Man. Both Thor films are quite entertaining, and even Iron Man 3 has a lot going for it. And while Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2 are the weakest of the bunch, they are still better than most comic book movies and both have a few good moments.

For Avengers 3, I'd love to see some crossover action with Spiderman and Wolverine. I'm sure the studios realize the kind of money they could make if they work together and cross promote. It would be SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY for a lot of people.


They're watchable movies. Decent movies. But not fantastic films. Avengers was dull as hell. Thor fights Iron Man. How's this gonna play out? A draw, maybe? Thor fights Hulk. woo. Hawkeye turns evil for no reason, and it all ends in a climactic battle against a faceless enemy army that's blowing up the planet because... well we're not sure why, they just showed up five minutes ago. Oh and Nick Fury is invulnerable. Who knew?
 
2014-08-05 11:35:46 AM  

thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all


You missed the point about both being about special blood.
 
2014-08-05 11:38:43 AM  

moothemagiccow: soporific: moothemagiccow: texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.

Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1

And I thought I'd have to be on the Politics tab to see a statement this wrong. (And if you're trolling, 10/10. Very nice.)

Captain America, The Avengers, Winter Soldier, and The Guardians of the Galaxy are fantastic films, in many ways surpassing Iron Man. Both Thor films are quite entertaining, and even Iron Man 3 has a lot going for it. And while Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2 are the weakest of the bunch, they are still better than most comic book movies and both have a few good moments.

For Avengers 3, I'd love to see some crossover action with Spiderman and Wolverine. I'm sure the studios realize the kind of money they could make if they work together and cross promote. It would be SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY for a lot of people.

They're watchable movies. Decent movies. But not fantastic films. Avengers was dull as hell. Thor fights Iron Man. How's this gonna play out? A draw, maybe? Thor fights Hulk. woo. Hawkeye turns evil for no reason, and it all ends in a climactic battle against a faceless enemy army that's blowing up the planet because... well we're not sure why, they just showed up five minutes ago. Oh and Nick Fury is invulnerable. Who knew?


1. Hawkeye doesn't turn evil for "no reason". If you watched the movie you would have seen the part where loki mind controls him.

2. The invading army wasn't trying to destroy the planet. Again, if you had watched the movie you would have understood that.
 
2014-08-05 11:41:01 AM  

WilderKWight: THIS IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

If they do this, then the MCU has to accept the history and stories told about Sony-Spidey and the FoX-Men as MCU canon. This runs directly counter to the history of the world they established in the MCU movies.


Stopped reading at this point. You do realize that MCU doesn't have to accept jack farking shiat if they were to get back the rights to those properties right? That they can just say these new flicks with these characters are part of the MCU, those movies with the other companies? Different Earth, different reality, whatever.
 
2014-08-05 11:53:59 AM  

Empty H: moothemagiccow: soporific: moothemagiccow: texdent: Captain Steroid: [i1182.photobucket.com image 384x659]

\ Keeping fingers crossed that the 3rd one tanks so Marvel can buy back the movie rights.

Marvel/Disney should just drive two or three dump trucks full of money to Sony to get Spidey back.

Doubt they could do any better. Last good flick was Iron Man 1

And I thought I'd have to be on the Politics tab to see a statement this wrong. (And if you're trolling, 10/10. Very nice.)

Captain America, The Avengers, Winter Soldier,......

They're watchable movies. Decent movies. But not fantastic films. Avengers was dull as hell. Thor fights Iron Man. How's this gonna play out? A draw, maybe? Thor fights Hulk. woo. Hawkeye turns evil for no reason, and it all ends in a climactic battle against a faceless enemy army that's blowing up the planet because... well we're not sure why, they just showed up five minutes ago. Oh and Nick Fury is invulnerable. Who knew?

1. Hawkeye doesn't turn evil for "no reason". If you watched the movie you would have seen the part where loki mind controls him.

2. The invading army wasn't trying to destroy the planet. Again, if you had watched the movie you would have understood that.


He's trying too hard now 3/10, his original troll was a 5/10 at best.
 
2014-08-05 11:54:37 AM  

Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.


Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen
 
2014-08-05 12:08:56 PM  

thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen


The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.
 
2014-08-05 12:14:13 PM  

Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.


Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.
 
2014-08-05 12:29:35 PM  

thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.

Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.


The magic blood from the bad guy can bring people back to life. Writing something like that into a story, any story not just a star trek story, can change that universe too much.

The transporter thing was dumb as well. Trek has often had a problem with the teleporters being too power, but this instance of being able to beam down but not up because "they are moving to fast" doesn't make sense.

Most of that movie was a poorly written story, not just a poorly written star trek story.
 
2014-08-05 12:45:49 PM  

Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.

Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.

The magic blood from the bad guy can bring people back to life. Writing something like that into a story, any story not just a star trek story, can change that universe too much.

The transporter thing was dumb as well. Trek has often had a problem with the teleporters being too power, but this instance of being able to beam down but not up because "they are moving to fast" doesn't make sense.

Most of that movie was a poorly written story, not just a poorly written star trek story.


Understood. And I know most Star Trek fans want something more about exploration and discovery, or like DS9 as opposed to an action/chase movie. Again, not my territory.

But I grew up reading ultimate Spider-Man and that's what I felt I got in ASM2 (the first was bad, I just liked the FX and fight scenes). The blood thing in ASM2 was what one character believed and it was a desperate attempt at clinging to life and I think I remember them saying it wouldn't even work. I'm just don't think the movies are comparable.
 
2014-08-05 01:03:55 PM  

thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.

Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.

The magic blood from the bad guy can bring people back to life. Writing something like that into a story, any story not just a star trek story, can change that universe too much.

The transporter thing was dumb as well. Trek has often had a problem with the teleporters being too power, but this instance of being able to beam down but not up because "they are moving to fast" doesn't make sense.

Most of that movie was a poorly written story, not just a poorly written star trek story.

Understood. And I know most Star Trek fans want something more about exploration and discovery, or like DS9 as opposed to an action/chase movie. Again, not my territory.

But I grew up reading ultimate Spider-Man and that's what I felt I got in ASM2 (the first was bad, I just liked the FX and fight scenes). The blood thing in ASM2 was what one character believed and it was a desperate attempt at clinging to life and I think I remember them saying it wouldn't even work. I'm just don't think the movies are comparable.


There is nothing wrong with action in a star trek story. I am pretty sure every episode and movie has had action.

But a foot chase where we get to see Spock, the character we have been told over and over is unemotional but his actions are usually emotional in these movies, be emotional again this movie. There was no point to that scene. Nothing was at stake. They didn't need his magic blood since they had 72 other magic blood bodies on ice. Also, how does magic human blood Bring a different species (tribble) back to life? Idiotic.
 
2014-08-05 01:54:59 PM  

Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.

Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.

The magic blood from the bad guy can bring people back to life. Writing something like that into a story, any story not just a star trek story, can change that universe too much.

The transporter thing was dumb as well. Trek has often had a problem with the teleporters being too power, but this instance of being able to beam down but not up because "they are moving to fast" doesn't make sense.

Most of that movie was a poorly written story, not just a poorly written star trek story.

Understood. And I know most Star Trek fans want something more about exploration and discovery, or like DS9 as opposed to an action/chase movie. Again, not my territory.

But I grew up reading ultimate Spider-Man and that's what I felt I got in ASM2 (the first was bad, I just liked the FX and fight scenes). The blood thing in ASM2 was ...


It was written by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof - the unholy trinity of hack writing.  Starting to pick apart plot holes and dialogue in any of their scripts will take you down a rabbit hole you won't return from.
 
2014-08-05 02:03:33 PM  

Doogled: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Empty H: thecpt: Confabulat: thecpt: I'm still confused as to how following only three characters is "too much plot" but yeah I'm happy they didn't go this route.

When the three characters in question spend all of 2.5 hours sharing subplots with a half dozen others, while none of them are bothered to be fleshed out in any way we'd care, while continually adding one new subplots and characters EVEN WHEN THE MOVIE IS NEARLY OVER...

yeah. You weren't confused about that at all. Star Trek Into Darkness all over again, same writers, same magic blood.

I really wasn't confused. More confused by comparing it to into darkness. Which also wasn't a tough one to follow. Like, at all

You missed the point about both being about special blood.

Considering the other pseudo/comic book science stuff, I was okay with blood comparability being a macguffen

The magic blood in ID is horrible writing.

Okay. I don't remember that movie too well to be honest. I watched it and was entertained, but I'm no trek fan. The thing I thought that was silly in that movie was the randomness of when they could or couldn't beam somebody up.

The magic blood from the bad guy can bring people back to life. Writing something like that into a story, any story not just a star trek story, can change that universe too much.

The transporter thing was dumb as well. Trek has often had a problem with the teleporters being too power, but this instance of being able to beam down but not up because "they are moving to fast" doesn't make sense.

Most of that movie was a poorly written story, not just a poorly written star trek story.

Understood. And I know most Star Trek fans want something more about exploration and discovery, or like DS9 as opposed to an action/chase movie. Again, not my territory.

But I grew up reading ultimate Spider-Man and that's what I felt I got in ASM2 (the first was bad, I just liked the FX and fight scenes). The blood thing in ASM2 was ...

It was written by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof - the unholy trinity of hack writing.  Starting to pick apart plot holes and dialogue in any of their scripts will take you down a rabbit hole you won't return from.


I am starting to find that out. I don't know anything about them. Do they have family connections or some other kind of pull in Hollywood? I am trying to understand why they keep getting paid to write stories like these.
 
2014-08-05 02:26:25 PM  

Empty H: I am starting to find that out. I don't know anything about them. Do they have family connections or some other kind of pull in Hollywood? I am trying to understand why they keep getting paid to write stories like these.


I actually don't know.  I think they jumped on the JJ Abrams bandwagon and have been booking jobs ever since.

Also, forgot to add David Goyer so make that the Axis of Hack Writing.  Farking David Goyer.
 
2014-08-05 02:44:20 PM  

Doogled: Empty H: I am starting to find that out. I don't know anything about them. Do they have family connections or some other kind of pull in Hollywood? I am trying to understand why they keep getting paid to write stories like these.

I actually don't know.  I think they jumped on the JJ Abrams bandwagon and have been booking jobs ever since.

Also, forgot to add David Goyer so make that the Axis of Hack Writing.  Farking David Goyer.


He did write the recent Batman movies, and those were pretty good. But he also did the recent Superman movie, which also included magic blood.
 
2014-08-05 03:00:44 PM  

Empty H: He did write the recent Batman movies, and those were pretty good. But he also did the recent Superman movie, which also included magic blood.


Starting to wonder if Goyer doesn't have a blood fetish of some sort. He wrote the Blade movies as well as the blade series.
 
2014-08-05 03:01:26 PM  

WilderKWight: If they do this, then the MCU has to accept the history and stories told about Sony-Spidey and the FoX-Men as MCU canon. This runs directly counter to the history of the world they established in the MCU movies.


Or they explain away the continuity issues with a magic handwave of parallel universes and some other reason. Make it a one shot deal and the heroes return to their respective worlds and call it a day. A good writer like Joss Whedon could come up with a pretty good reason for why it all works.There's always "Because Thanos." That's a pretty good reason. Him wielding the infinity gauntlet could be a good reason.

Besides, if I'm going to accept that not one, but two mixtapes from the 1980's survive countless space battles, and I do, then I can accept a plausible reason that Spiderman and Wolverine can show up to the MCU.
 
2014-08-05 03:07:15 PM  

soporific: WilderKWight: If they do this, then the MCU has to accept the history and stories told about Sony-Spidey and the FoX-Men as MCU canon. This runs directly counter to the history of the world they established in the MCU movies.

Or they explain away the continuity issues with a magic handwave of parallel universes and some other reason. Make it a one shot deal and the heroes return to their respective worlds and call it a day. A good writer like Joss Whedon could come up with a pretty good reason for why it all works.There's always "Because Thanos." That's a pretty good reason. Him wielding the infinity gauntlet could be a good reason.

Besides, if I'm going to accept that not one, but two mixtapes from the 1980's survive countless space battles, and I do, then I can accept a plausible reason that Spiderman and Wolverine can show up to the MCU.


Funny enough I accept a Walkman would survive that, but a diskman? fark no.

Is it weird that Sony was on that Walkman in big letters?
 
2014-08-06 05:02:13 AM  

Doogled: It was written by Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, and Damon Lindelof - the unholy trinity of hack writing. Starting to pick apart plot holes and dialogue in any of their scripts will take you down a rabbit hole you won't return from.


They also wrote magic blood into Transformers Prime. Unicron's blood brings tribbles back to life! And makes zombies out of transformers.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report