Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Movies
Byrne Robotics > Movies << Prev Page of 23 Next >>
Topic: SPIDER-MAN: Far From Home ~ SPOILERS begin pg 8 Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6154
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 7:15pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply


Wow, buncha sourpusses tonight!



Back to Top profile | search
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12887
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 7:44pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

I've been telling you guys, Raimi wasn't that bad after all...

óó

The Raimi films had some great action set pieces and a perfect JJJ. Otherwise, they were the weakest of the Spider-Man movies. 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14970
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:07pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Other than the third film, Sam Raimi's take seemed to be popular with most viewers and fans I spoke with. Since "Homecoming" is there now some revisionism that says Raimi's films were all bad?  *

*Yes, I realize that every film so far has something to criticize,  but...
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Vinny Valenti
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 6594
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:07pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

I thought that the first hour of SPIDER-MAN 2 was near perfect, up until that moment where he psychosomatically loses his powers in mid-air and falls 10+ stories to the ground and walks it off. It all went downhill from there.

Edited by Vinny Valenti on 15 January 2019 at 8:08pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Matt Hawes
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14970
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:09pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

 Michael Roberts wrote:
...Otherwise, they were the weakest of the Spider-Man movies... 

Weaker than the Andrew Garfield films? Both of them?

Ah, well... everyone has their own opinions. 
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Brandon Frye
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 November 2004
Posts: 1169
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:16pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

Personally, I thought they damn-near had it right with the Andrew Garfield version, at least in terms of Spider-Man himself. 

 
Back to Top profile | search
 
Shaun Barry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 December 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6154
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:20pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply


Garfield's "Spider-Man" was wonderful.

It's his "Peter Parker" that stunk.



Back to Top profile | search
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15625
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:26pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

The Raimi films have their problems, but they most closely resemble the source material (at least if you squint really hard).

The Webb movies are awful. Made only because Sony didn't want to lose the license, and so they threw crap movies together with the intent of being as different from the Raimi movies as possible. And kickstarting a cinematic universe to compete with the MCU. It...didn't work out.

These new movies are closer to the mark, but still way off. Not as terrible as the Webb movies, but not as focused or (relatively) on-model as the Raimi films.


Mix together elements from all three iterations, and you might have a perfect Spider-Man movie. As it is, each post-Raimi iteration has been a case of one step forward, two steps back. The Webb movies gave us mechanical web-shooters, but screwed up a bunch of other stuff that Raimi got reasonably correct. And the new movies have done a good job of capturing that early high school feeling for the character, but have gotten still other things wrong which had previously been closer to correct.

And Aunt May keeps getting younger and hotter, which Does Not Compute. Of course, the entire supporting cast is virtually unrecognizable in these new films, aside from the names.

Maguire's Peter Parker was often written wrong, but he physically fit the part well, and turned in solid performances. Garfield is a fine actor, but he's too tall, and was written as if he was playing The Autistic Spider-Man--too spazzy. Holland is quite good, but, as previously noted, the character comes across as a bit too naÔve and "gee-whiz", and is somewhat lacking the agency and the attitude of the Lee-Ditko version. YMMV.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15625
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:26pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Garfield's "Spider-Man" was wonderful.

It's his "Peter Parker" that stunk.
+++++++++

Yep.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Brian Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 14 November 2006
Posts: 8274
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 8:45pm | IP Logged | 10 post reply

Having let go of the idea that my Spidey from the 60's and 70's will ever find a home onscreen, I actually really enjoyed that trailer. I like Holland. I like the rest of the cast. I like that not everything in Spidey's life has to take place in New York. It's a bold move pulling the "'Facts of Life' cast goes to Europe" trick this late in the game. And it's not as if there is no New York in all of that footage. 

Secret identities are gone as a story convention. JB's Man of Steel took away their relevance to the story and everyone since has failed to see any point to them, at least so far as the hero's loved ones and the intelligence community is concerned. Everyone knows who the hero is all the time now. It's just the way they play the game now. Maybe once they see its an easy way to start gunning down supporting characters (as Miles' friend Ganke* is here, albeit harmlessly) things will change. Probably not.

While I still don't love the fact that no one wears a mask except when they're rendering in CGI, eh. I'm taking these things as they come now rather than wishing they were something else. If Hollywood knocks on my door, yeah, I'll do my Spider-Man movie differently, at least so far as they'll allow me to, but for what these new ones are, they are a hella lotta fun. 

* You will never convince me that isn't him.

Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12887
Posted: 15 January 2019 at 9:16pm | IP Logged | 11 post reply

 Matt Hawes wrote:
Weaker than the Andrew Garfield films? Both of them?

Yep! I'll be the first to admit that AMAZING SPIDER-MAN 2 was a mess, but the first 5 minutes of that movie was far superior to all of the Raimi films. The Raimi films got off on the wrong foot from the opening narration:

 Not the real Spider-Man wrote:
Who am I? You sure you want to know? The story of my life is not for the faint of heart. If somebody said it was a happy little tale...if somebody told you I was just an average ordinary guy, not a care in the world...somebody lied. But let me assure you: This, like any story worth telling, is all about a girl. That girl. The girl next door. Mary Jane Watson. The woman I've loved since before I even liked girls.

Spider-Man's life story is about Mary Jane? Fuck that. Then we have the dour, silent, non-quippy Spider-Man and the Peter Parker by way of Sheldon from THE BIG BANG THEORY. That's not the character. Sure, Raimi got some of the window dressing right, but he turned "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" into "With Great Power Comes an Opportunity to Make My Heroism and Sacrifices All About Mary Jane."

 Shaun Berry wrote:
Garfield's "Spider-Man" was wonderful.

It's his "Peter Parker" that stunk.

See, I'd argue that Webb's Peter is the most accurate to Peter of the Lee/Ditko era. The idea that Peter would be a social outcast just because he was academically gifted doesn't work today. Hell, it was a dated stereotype went I was in high school in the 90s. Plus, a lot of Peter's outcast status was self-inflicted. He was a little bit arrogant and set himself apart from his peers because he thought they wouldn't get him.

Garfield's sensitive emo outcast seemed like an attempt to translate that Peter in a modern context. I get why people don't like it, but I understand what they were trying to do. Holland's Peter just tries to sidestep that entirely by transplanting his college-age dynamic to his high school one.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Bill Collins
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 26 May 2005
Location: England
Posts: 10691
Posted: 16 January 2019 at 2:31am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Peter wrote "So Peter decides to leave his costume at
home"

Brian wrote "But he didnít, Peter. It was in his
suitcase"

It looks from the trailer link that Brian supplied, that
May packed the suit, see the post-it note.
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 

<< Prev Page of 23 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login