Author |
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133274
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 8:33am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
I don't think that it's "bending over backwards" to make organic shooters plausible with the carbon nanotubes. The natural world comes up with amazing ways to solve problems -- it also designs for efficiency at times.•• Nature "designs" for function, not efficiency. As soon as something works, Nature "loses interest". Take a close look at the human body as a good f'rinstance. And I would definitely call it "bending over backwards" to have Nature "invent" nanotubes to replace spider silk.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Steven Myers Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 10 June 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5678
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 9:03am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Peter being so smart helps his character because it shows that intelligence alone doesn't mean you will be happy and successful all the time. Roger Stern once remarked to me that people think of Peter Parker as the "regular guy with powers" but he's not. Peter is the "really really smart kid". Peter's intelligence made him an outcast before he got his powers. As JB says above, being Spider-Man helps him deal with his social status. But the problems in his life were already there.
AF 15 shows how badly Peter sometimes deals with things. He's a genius, He's not perfect.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133274
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 9:06am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Ditko also felt that it was important for Parker to be a teenager, so he could still screw up in the way teenagers do. I have often corrected people when they call Parker a "loser", noting that he is not a loser, is is a sad sack, a hard luck case, which is something else entirely. However, I have stopped making this point in the past few years, as it has slowly dawned on me that a 29 year old who still screws up the same way he did when he was a teenager is indeed a loser.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Michael Penn Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 12 April 2006 Location: United States Posts: 12701
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 9:18am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Stan Lee & co. created their characters as complete people. If Steve Rogers had been bitten by the irradiated spider and Peter Parker had been injected with the Super Soldier serum, we would not have the same superheroes. Peter's youth, intelligence, family situation, social status, etc., these are all fundamental to whom Spider-Man is.
About the original teenage Peter, although he was harried in school, mostly by Flash Thompson, he was far from a loser -- particularly with the girls!
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
John Byrne
Grumpy Old Guy
Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 133274
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 9:21am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Parker was a loser with the ladies in much the same way Chandler Bing was. "Oh, you poor devil! You have to sleep with a different beautiful woman every week!!!"
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Paulo Pereira Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 24 April 2006 Posts: 15539
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 9:25am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
And Parker gave as good as he got against Flash, as far as repartee.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Arc Carlton Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 13 April 2009 Location: Peru Posts: 3493
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 11:10am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Parker was a loser with the ladies in much the same way Chandler Bing was. "Oh, you poor devil! You have to sleep with a different beautiful woman every week!!!"
________________________
And yet Chandler had a better paying job, which could mean more opportunities to impress the ladies...
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
|
Sean Blythe Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 13 July 2006 Location: United States Posts: 342
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 11:37am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Sam Raimi may have made the final decision on the organic webbing, but it
wasn't his idea. James Cameron's well-circulated
"scriptment" for his
version of Spider-Man had it first (follow that link, search for webbing, and
you'll find the kind-of-icky scene that details this.)
I saw an interview with him somewhere (can't find it here) that chalked it up
to a production/filming issue -- he just couldn't explain why those bulky
webshooters disappeared under a skin-tight costume, and there was no way
he was going to do something like this:
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Stephen Robinson Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004 Location: United States Posts: 5835
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 11:46am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
I saw an interview with him somewhere (can't find it here) that chalked it up to a production/filming issue -- he just couldn't explain why those bulky webshooters disappeared under a skin-tight costume
************
SER: Uhmm... because they did?
It's sort of like the bulky Batman costume in the recent movies. OK, fine, the costume is designed so as to be bullet resistant and knife proof... but it's not real, it doesn't have to actually do this. Christian Bale isn't going to have to *really* fight crime, so there was never a real reason why the costume couldn't look the way it looked in the comics (and even in the comics, they've made a point of saying that the costume is bullet resistant while still looking the same for the most part as it always had).
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
|
Victor Rodgers Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 December 2004 Posts: 3508
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 11:51am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
What, ordinary people don't have incredible futures ahead of them?
***** Yeah pretty much. They aren't going to be inventing inflatable toilets and working with super scientist like Reed Richards.
Edited by Victor Rodgers on 07 August 2009 at 12:53pm
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Sam Karns Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 December 2004 Location: United States Posts: 7624
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 12:08pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
I do agree that the second movie demonstrated Peters intelligence better...
***
I guess so if I have to bare Parker talking about faux science with Octavius, then later after knowing his powers is faulty he decides to web swing through the city with hazzardous results. I must mentioned Parker does this several times which generated laughs. Did he really demonstate his intelligence just because he sparked a conversation with the villain? Movies are a visual medium, and having a chit chat about smart stuff doesn't equate him being intelligent while doing stupid things through out the film.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|
Sean Blythe Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 13 July 2006 Location: United States Posts: 342
|
Posted: 07 August 2009 at 12:09pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
SER: Uhmm... because they did?
It's sort of like the bulky Batman costume in the recent movies. OK, fine,
the costume is designed so as to be bullet resistant and knife proof... but
it's not real, it doesn't have to actually do this. Christian Bale isn't going to
have to *really* fight crime, so there was never a real reason why the
costume couldn't look the way it looked in the comics (and even in the
comics, they've made a point of saying that the costume is bullet
resistant while still looking the same for the most part as it always
had).
Comicbooks and movies are different beasts, with different conventions
and considerations. What may be an acceptable leap from one frame to
the next may appear to be a continuity error in a motion picture. What
may look menacing when drawn may look laughable when it's an actor in
a costume. And what may be a cool few panels of fun pseudo-scientific
invention in one may be an unjustifiably long few minutes of screen time
in another.
I'm not justifying the decisions comicbook movies make, but I think the
movie-makers DO think about them in rational terms.
|
Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
|