MugiwaraCole
Member
Man's thought about becoming a villain lmfao
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Spider-Man 1 and 2 hold up very well.
- Thread starter Uzumaki Goku
- Start date
Man's thought about becoming a villain lmfao
Hellboy was dope
Anyways, I hate Raimi's version of Peter and MJ so I've never liked the trilogy.
nah, there's the 1989 Batman movie, maybe the second, the first two Ninja Turtles movies,
Spawn
probably missing some
this is a Spider Man thing
Sin City was amazing.
If I was Spider-Man I would've said fuck MJ and gotten Black Cat locked doooooown
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Why not both? I think Raimi absolutely could have made the movie he wanted to with a version of Peter that was 100% lifted straight out of the best Spider-Man comics. He chose not to go in that direction which is fine, and I think people lamenting that aren't just hating on the movies for no good reason (well some are) - they want a new, more faithful take on the character that hopefully manages to have the artistic vision and charm that Raimi's movies had.
MugiwaraCole
Member
Only reason this doesn't make sense is, in 2017, we now know it is possible to have both, even if the Spidey movies have all fallen into one of two camps (sorta, SM3 wasn't either lmao).
Of course it can happen. I'm just saying, a lot of people dislike Batman Returns and Spider-Man 2 because of how unfaithful they are, but they're my favorite because I love to see a director with a strong vision adapt something their own way. It's something I don't really see in the MCU (except maybe GotG).
edit: to the people saying "Why not both?", I'm with you. But Raimi wanted to do it his way and it made for a great movie (imo), so I wouldn't want it any other way. If another director comes out with a Spider-Man ripped from the comics pages and make a case for it, I'm sure I'll love it too!
Fist bump. I was so hyped for the final showdown after that scene. Everything building up to Pete coming back as Spidey and stealing his suit back from Jonah was perfect.
MugiwaraCole
Member
That's all preference. I have no problem admitting Spider-Man 2 is a great movie. My disdain for it is purely from the "not Spidey" angle.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
Iron Man 3 is actually the best Iron Man movie. GAF just crazy.
Unless it's by James Gunn don't expect to see anyone's vision in the MCU.
George Oscar Bluth II
Banned
Mr. Poolman
Member
Sgt. Kabukiman
Banned
I get what you mean and we're not going to agree on this but here's where I stand:
They are good movies. They are called Spider-Man. They are good Spider-Man movies.
And they are the default version of the character for millions of people around the world. And if some of these people looked at the comics, they might say: "that's not how the real Spider-Man would act!" Which is why I don't care about such things when it comes to characters that have been around for decades. Looking for consistency is useless. Nolan's Batman is different from current comic Batman who is different from 60s Batman who was wildly different from 39 Batman. That guy was a fun-loving murderer with a gun. But they're all valid interpretations of the concept.
And for what it's worth, Raimi's Spider-Man perfectly embodied the essence of the 70s Spider-Man reprints I used to read as a kid. So they are a faithful adaptation from my point of view. But even then, I love Man of Steel and that depiction of Superman is wildly different from the Superman I like in the comics. I still consider it to be a Superman film.
Anyway, the internet would be a much happier place if comic-book fans could realize that their version of a particular character is not the one and only.
I absolutely agree, I had just forgotten. I think the third act still goes back to the mold with that over the top action sequence, but other than that it was great.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
I mean we're talking about IM3 right now which is Shane Black as fuck.
He still wasn't a spineless loser in those early years.
He never was - girls were fawning over him from the jump.
Just because that was a relatable version of the character to you, doesn't mean it's true to the comics nor does it make for a compelling hero.
I mean, I've read the entire Stan Lee run. I'm talking REAL early, pre-Gwen Stacy, when that awkward Betty Brant stuff is all he's getting. And the Peter in those comics is a real loser. Maybe I'm giving either too much or too little credit to Lee's writing, but I read a spineless Parker who puts on his costume to get a modicum of confidence.
The premise of Spider-Man, for me, is "average outcast by day, troubled hero by night." That's the elevator pitch. If you stray from that, you're missing the point.
yeah it was really good
I might still err towards the first Iron Man but I'm 100% considering it's impact as the time. also why I will continue to fluff up the first X Men movie.
Those two movies are amazing. Spider Man 2 is the GOAT superhero movie. Awesome amount of action, comedy and story mixed with excellent and well implemented CG effects.
It's videogame is also the best superhero game ever made. I played the hell out of Spider Man 2 on Gamecube and loved every minute of it.
I liked Tobey as Peter Parker *shrug*
Oh and never saw the third movie because of the awful reviews hah. Guess I will do this week thanks to this thread just to see if it's as bad as most people claim.
It's videogame is also the best superhero game ever made. I played the hell out of Spider Man 2 on Gamecube and loved every minute of it.
I liked Tobey as Peter Parker *shrug*
Oh and never saw the third movie because of the awful reviews hah. Guess I will do this week thanks to this thread just to see if it's as bad as most people claim.
Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 are the only MCU movies I haven't seen yet.
Not in a world where the Batman Arkham games exist.
Damn right it is.
Pai Pai Master
Banned
I would say the whole "MCU production process eclipses directors vision" thing is pretty overstated. But Thor 2 is definitely an example of where it came from and has some merit. Iron Man 3 on the other hand is the polar opposite and Shane Black's hands on it definitely show.
I love the first two Arkham games but nothing beats swinging through town in Spiderman 2.
Nolan's Batman still maintains the essence of the Batman and Bruce Wayne character though. And that's where my problem has come from the portrayals of Peter and MJ in these movies. The Man of Steel movie, one of my favorites. The Superman is different but I believed you could see the formation of his core ideals there, a consistency. With these characters, regardless of what is happening, they maintain some form of consistency. Red Son Superman still has the same ideals and traits, Ultimate Peter Parker, Ultimate Reed Richards, and so on amd so forth. My version of Spider-Man has been around forever, just never accurately portrayed in a movie to me. His core character traits such as putting the world on his shoulders, being a damn near genius, being a dude with no confidemce who fails upward in his personal life, has supreme confidence as Spider-Man, being a pest as Spider-Man, being so fucking serious all the same, that's been around forever.
That's all. So again, the Raimi joints? Fine movies. Good even. But they ain't good Spider-Man portrayals.
MugiwaraCole
Member
Compromising parts of your vision because your film has to work in a larger universe doesn't mean none of what these directors put up is their vision. Claiming otherwise is stupid.
Also, saying "they're good movies called Spider-Man makes them good Spider-Man movies" is rather simple.
I'll eventually get around to Iron Man 3. But I'll probably just skip Thor 2 and go straight to 3.
Thor
Iron Man 3
Avengers
Avengers 2
Thor 3 looks like it
Guardians
Guardians 2
Ant-Man
Black Panther by the trailer
Just a few examples of the director's vision amd style still being arouns in these movies but push ya agenda
✊🏾
Whedon, Johnston, Russos & Shane Black
hell there are still shades of Wright in AM
Waitit & Coogler already shine through their teasers
Half of those movies are extremely generic and uninspired.
Not so sure about that! Spidey 2 was awesome.
oooo nah
Okay
So even though they prove that they director's style and vision can clearly be shown
Because you think they generic and uninspired it doesn't matter? Gotcha.
That game outside of Swinging is not good.
cr0w
Old Member
I like Batman Returns if I watch it as a Burton movie and not as a Batman movie. If I were to do the latter, it would drive me insane as a Batman fan, and it did when I first saw it in the theater.
I'm just not a fan of Raimi in general beyond Evil Dead, I think he relies too much on his tropes and it takes me out of his work, so his Spidey movies already had that working against them for me.
gotta move the goalposts to preserve the "mcu is just corporate movie-factory robot beep boop"
Says the guy that thinks Logan was generic.
LinkAndEpona
Banned
I absolutely loved Spider-Man 2 because Dr. Octopus is one of my favorite villains.
I guess if you like saving balloons.
I didn't say generic
I said it existed and I didn't like it
If you gonna come for me come correctly please and thank you
that game was cool at the time. also that warehouse you can find late in the game was cool as fuck, with all the enemies in there. I put so many hours into that.
it may not have aged well but I'll always like the PS1 Spider Man better though. that game had it all for me.
also Ultimate Spider Man > Spider Man 2
This
It's hard to when you can't even form a coherent criticism on why you think the action in Logan looked "janky"
DryEyeRelief
Member
It sounds like you want a self-insert.
PREACH. Throwing the motercycle at Wolverine in the beginning = good shit.
So because you were called out you gonna move positions to try and attack my thoughts on Logan? Lol. Get outta this thread with that shit. Go to the lttp of you wanna talk shit.
Similar threads
- Poll