Author |
|
Robert LaGuardia Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 November 2007 Location: United States Posts: 1296
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 2:32pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
As I recall the movies made it known several times that Peter was an abnormally bright student. If you don't like the idea of organic web shooters that's fine, but it's disingenuous to say the movies neglected to make Peter a genius.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 2:34pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Robert L. wrote:
If you don't like the idea of organic web shooters that's fine, but
it's disingenuous to say the movies neglected to make Peter a genius.
|
|
|
When did they ever demonstrate this, though?
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133317
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 2:36pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
As I recall the movies made it known several times that Peter was an abnormally bright student. If you don't like the idea of organic web shooters that's fine, but it's disingenuous to say the movies neglected to make Peter a genius.•• The second movie did a better job of showing Peter's smarts, but the first only had people talking about it -- a mortal sin in moviemaking. In fact, the most "smart" scene was when Parker tells Osborn he has read on of his papers -- which several civilian friends of mine, bringing no backstory into the theater with them, took as Peter BSing to impress Norman. And the first movie is, of course, the one in which it is most important to show Peter's smarts, in terms of establishing the character -- unless you're Sam Raimi.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133317
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 2:37pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Why waste time selling pictures to JJJ for pocket change when he could be a rich inventor…•• Apparently you have no idea how long it takes to patent and copyright an invention -- even assuming you have a lawyer who will do the work for free, up front.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Jeremiah Avery Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2008 Location: United States Posts: 2431
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 2:59pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
I can attest to that. Even if Peter had a lawyer working for free, the USPTO has many filing fees as well as renewal fees (once it's patented) and it can take years before a patent can be issued (and that's if someone else hasn't already invented something analogous).
I always liked the mechanical webshooters. When he'd run out of web fluid in some issues, Spider-Man had to be more resourceful in overcoming the obstacle. Plus, as a kid, I thought it was a "cool" device.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Wayde Murray Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 October 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 3115
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 3:18pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
JB wrote:
The second movie did a better job of showing Peter's smarts, but the first only had people talking about it -- a mortal sin in moviemaking.
Even the second movie fell into the routine of having someone we were shown was smart (Curt Conners, Otto Octavius) talking about how smart Peter was ("gifted, but lazy" was the term, as I recall). But come the end of the movie, it was Octavius who figured out how to overload his runaway device, and who then sacrifice himself to disable it. Even if Peter had been able to figure this one thing out independantly (especially if Octavius had assured him it couldn't be done), it would have been something.
We never saw any real indication that Peter could accomplish more than being a photographer or a pizza delivery guy. While he did many things that could be construed as stupid, he did nothing that demonstrated genius.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133317
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 3:24pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Am I misremembering? I have watched the movie only once, but I thought there was a chat between Peter and Octavius at the dinner table that showed young Mr. Parker could hold his own on an intellectual level? Certainly something more convincing than "I read your paper."
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Jeremiah Avery Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 December 2008 Location: United States Posts: 2431
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 3:29pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
From what I remember, Octavius was talking about his work and Peter was asking how he overcame certain hurdles. That, at least to me, conveyed he knew more than just what was in a paper Octavius may have written.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 3:51pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
There's a (horrible) transcript here (horrible because none of the speakers are labelled).
Anyway, Peter is writing a paper on Dr. Octavius and is introduced to him by Dr. Connors. At some point, the exchange goes thusly:
Peter Parker: So is that it? (referring to Octavius' invention) Otto Octavius: Yes. My design to initiate and sustain fusion. PP: I understand you use harmonics of atomic frequencies.
OO: Sympathetic frequencies.
PP: Harmonic reinforcement? OO: Go on. PP: An exponential increase in energy output. OO: A huge amount of energy. Like a perpetual sun providing renewable power for the whole world.
PP: Are you sure you could stabilize the fusion reaction? OO: Peter, what have we been talking about for the last hour and a half? This is my life's work. I certainly know the consequences of the slightest miscalculation. PP: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to question you.
I'm actually not sure who is saying "Harmonic reinforcement," "Go on" or "An exponential increase..." thanks to the crappy transcript. Perhaps someone else can confirm.
Anyway, later, when Peter asks how to stop the device, Doc Ock tells him it can't be stopped, except by drowning it.
So, basically, it seems Peter's intelligence is barely hinted at.
Edited by Paulo Pereira on 06 August 2009 at 3:55pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Robert LaGuardia Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 November 2007 Location: United States Posts: 1296
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 4:00pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
QUOTE:
The second movie did a better job of showing Peter's smarts, but the first only had people talking
about it -- a mortal sin in moviemaking. In fact, the most "smart"
scene was when Parker tells Osborn he has read on of his papers --
which several civilian friends of mine, bringing no backstory into the
theater with them, took as Peter BSing to impress Norman. And the first
movie is, of course, the one in which it is most important to show
Peter's smarts, in terms of establishing the character -- unless you're
Sam Raimi. |
|
|
I do agree that the second movie demonstrated Peters intelligence better, but as I recall, and I say this after unsuccessfully looking for the script online, that opening scene with Osborne did not play as if Peter was trying to impress him. I'm still trying to remember, didn't Peter have some more science talk with Osborn at some point later on? Let me ask this. Would you have had the same problem if they made the spider genetically manipulated to be able to shoot webs out of it's legs? Or is the building of the web shooters specifically important also? I ask this sincerely to get a grasp on where the problem lies. I And on a related topic, JB how do you feel about the scene showing the hairs on his fingers. I thought it was visually interesting and well done, but the scene following where he starts climbing the wall doesn't "sell" the idea to me.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 4:16pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Click here for the SPIDER-MAN transcript.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Peyton Holden Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 15 February 2009 Location: United States Posts: 424
|
Posted: 06 August 2009 at 4:38pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Thanks, Kevin!
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
|