Heehee, Parker will pull you up on something eventually so I may as well point it out - Spider-Man was bitten by a genetically engineered spider. They tinkerred with his origin a bit.
That was probably the one thing that bugged (no pun intended) me the most. The fact that EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG knows that SPider-Man was bitten by a radioactive spider. We've see that origin spoofed and parodied all the time. Spider-Mans radioactive spider bite is possibly the most famous superhero origin of them all. So why the hell was he bitten by a non-radioactive super-spider, one of fifteen in fact. I've gone over a million times as to why I think this is plain stupid (the fact that there was more than one of them and it bit him out of spite rather than it dying of radiation - meaning there should be a few Spider-Men and Spider-Women scientists swinging around I think). It's insiginificant to the character, but I seriously don't know why they thought changing the origin was a good idea, especially since the original origin, however ridiculous it was, was more realistic than the supposedly "more realistic" movie alternative. The spider bit him in the comics for a reason, in the movie, it was just an aggressive SOB, and it didn't die - surely it would just carry on biting, and biting and biting more people?
That's me being nit-picky, mainly because it is a legitimate plot-hole more than betraying any comic. I wouldn't have minded the change if it made sense. Yeah, I know it's a movie, but its a bit of a blooper.
Last edited by Red Superfly on Jan 22nd, 2005 at 05:23 PM
The spider bit him in the comics for a reason, in the movie, it was just an aggressive SOB, and it didn't die - surely it would just carry on biting, and biting and biting more people?
That's me being nit-picky, mainly because it is a legitimate plot-hole more than betraying any comic. I wouldn't have minded the change if it made sense. Yeah, I know it's a movie, but its a bit of a blooper. [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually its not nit picking at all,its a very good point you make.Thats just one of many many mistakes in that film that make it such a horrible film.There is no excuse for such horrible screenwriting like that.As I said,the second one didnt have anywhere near as many stupid bloopers in it as the first one did and not anywhere near as many cheesy lines thats why it was much more critically acclaimed.Now saying something like wolvie not wearing a mask in the xmen movies like I have seen a few people say before on a few occassions in the xmen section now THAT would be nitpicking because it makes no sense for HIM to have a mask and not the others,so that was a reasonable change.the spiderman movies,especially the first one,have so many stupid and unreasonable changes such as organics,and mj's character being 95% gwen stacy and only about 5% mj,that the spiderman movies are a joke.
Last edited by Mr Parker on Jan 22nd, 2005 at 07:49 PM
I would say Batman is the best.The Spiderman movie sucks.I did not care too much for the superman ones either.JM
__________________ Lord Matt Parker Clare moose Clovie Danii furryman Shellie Jason Yoda(Son) chris Slipknot English(son)a1hsauce ROB Penny Alice and Taft Napalm Sim Telperala Bardock42 Aku Lara Spriderman Lady Slytherin Mike Cherrypie and Fearnix Raggie Dark1365 Syren Tired Hiker LadyGrim and Spoonly(mypimp)Puddin Gisele FEDfan316 and Dean spazzymcgee14 Kharhmah Pink Diamond Lazerus(Husband) Syko Freak Lance Bordom Laurie kelly jason Bert Tecknoyashi Maya Grand Moff Gav(Lawer) Fopret Ketchuptome23453245 Gen Grevious(son) Chelsea17 Snehin Apollox Shaggy2dope(son)Big Evil Twelling4ever Powerfulone DamienB Mew Cherry Leowyatt.
I dont know why writers for films have to keep changing comic book characters. Its disloyal to the many comic book readers who have spent their hard earned cash to make the character a Brand name! They should stick to the original storyline and make the plots new! But the character's not their's so they should keep it real!
MR Parker, I hope that explains your anger at man spider films. Its trying to bring originality to an old stuff in a new format! Like when a song is redone by another artist five or ten years later. They did bring
spiderman down though cus the web shooters were a source of dnager, supposing it ran out when he was in mid air? Plus sticking to the original stuff keeps the dream alive.
mr. parker, how can u say that? for someone who hates the spiderman movies cause of their lack of detail i would think you would hate superman with a passion. i mean, they gave superman new powers whenever the script demanded it, i.e. teleportation, eyebeams that can rebuild walls, ability to make holograms of himself, etc. i could go on. the fortress of solitude was one big ice cube with nothing but crystals, nothing like the comics and the action was somewhat dull. i respect your opinion on the spiderman movies but i think you need to look at the superman movies with the same fine tooth comb u took to the spiderman movies.
i wonder, why do you go see these superhero movies if you come out of it so disappointed most of the time? i think you are like alot of starwar fans. they will talk to no end on how much the prequels suck but no matter what they will go see the new flick when it comes out.
Well to address your first post,thats because the changes they made in the superman movies were reasonable and not stupid like the changes they made in the spiderman movies.organic webshooters are on the same level as superman flying around on a jetpack,pointless and stupid with no logical justiifcation behind them other than that it was simply lazy film making which is inexcusable.To address THIS point,THATS the key right there,you said MOST of the time.I dont come out dissapointed ALL the time otherwise I wouldnt.I really enjoyed Daredevil and feel that its the first good comicbook film made since superman other than dick tracy.So as long as hollywood makes a good comicbook film once in a while like they did with Dick Tracy and Daredevil,I'll still go see comicbook films.Matter of fact,I havent seen it yet but I am really excited about Seeing Elecktra,that looks to be the best comicbook film made since Superman 2.Hope that answers your question satisfactorily?
Last edited by Mr Parker on Jan 27th, 2005 at 03:47 PM
Mr. Parkers opinions and judgments cannot be take seriously.
Cause someone that appreciate DAREDEVIL, and says it's the best comic book movie since SUPERMAN, it's like listening to a supporter of the worst team of the Major League saying the NY Giants is the worst Base-Ball team ever created.
DareDevil was 70% rubbish and 30% quite good.
They choose Ben Affleck, did i need to say more?
He's only good interpretations were those in Armageddon, Dogma, Will Hunting, that's all.
Jennifer Garner can be Elektra only in a fanboy dream.She's blonde, she has light green eyes, she has white skin.
Elektra has BLACK hairs and eyes, she's greek, and her skin is more dark.Jennifer Garner also looks like she's acting into a mix of Dawson's Creek and Beautiful and not in a comic book movie.
Those two elements mixed are the 70% of rubbish of the movie.
A great Colin Farrel.He looks like he's really psycotic, sociopath killer, that has a perfect aim and likes to kill just cause he likes it.
Crap things with his character are the tatoo, the trenchcoat, the shurikens in the belt.
Ok the big K is white in comic books, but in real world they need to find someone that can pull out the role in a good manner and has the physical requirements.
M.C.D. is a hella big man, and with the outfit they give him he was able to reproduce a KingPin i like very much, the fight with DareDevil also shows is famous upper human limit strenght.
This are the only good things in DD movie.All the rest sucks very good ^^.
Mr. Parker you says the Sony's Spider-Man sucks, let me tell you, no offense, you don't understand even the 1% of what takes to create a movie, so you cannot appreciate Spider-Man.
He lives in the Queens with his uncles, the actors that interpretate them were quite good.Tobey Maguire was very good.He was the perfect nerd, then the super-spider bite him, and his life becomes more troubled and hard than before, but also more fun and interesting.
The comic books origins of the Spider that bites him were revealed more after the release of the movie, so they cannot put in the movie that kind of thing.Also Spider-Man was more inspired to Ultimate Spider-Man than to the Classical Spider-Man.
In USM Peter is bited froma genetic alterated spider, in USM Osborn use on himself the serum that alterate the spider to grant himself superpowers.In the movie the spider is a result of genetic manipulation, and Osborn use on himself the supersoldier serum he create.
Back to Peter, he do the exact things he do in USM and normal SM, the death of uncle Ben was maked in a wonderful manner, the atmosphere makes the people in the cinema crying when i go watching it at the cinema.Then Peter change, after he defeat the thief, he become a vigilante, and hero, and his sense of responsability grow thanks to what uncle Ben says to him.His costume is practically = to that of the comics, the webs, the webs comes from his body, and from someone bited by an alterated Spider is "normal".
Willem Dafoe, nearly perfect Osborn.
Yes he's not physically builted(Osborn is physically bigger than the Osborn in the movie), but he pick up the role and pull out a great Norman Osborn.The Goblin-Armor thing wasn't so good, i was waiting to see him dressing up with the outfit we all know, but they choose to give him a bulletproof armor.The Goblin-Glider have a new design, it shoots bullets and missiles it was very fun to watch.Goblin's weapons were all there, except for the electrical blasts from his gloves, which shoots sleeping gas.
Bad, louder, bastardly fun.He was made perfect, the hair cut, outfit, except for the physical dimensions of the actor, it was very fun to see J.J.J. acting likes he does in the comics.
Very good too, but the actor can't pull out Robertson physically.Robbie has a good physical condition, the actor is too much big and little fat, but anyway good to see.
In the second movie, Doctor Octopus arrives in Peter's life, as a mentor before and has an enemy after.
Alfred Molina was perfect, the mechanical arms were perfect, all the movie was fun to watch.
But NOOOOOO, here comes Mr.Parker like a die hard Hulk Fanboy, with his own opinions, don't knowing what kind of work there is behind the 2 movies, and i say it cause i know it, cause in my highschool i study 3D Animation, Visual Effects, 2D Animation, Video Compositing, Motion Capture, and the hystory of the Cinema, and how it works and what kind of professions there are in.
So with my knowledge, i can tell you that all your ASSUMPTIONS, and all your hate is that of someone that probably hate the movies cause you are a nearly MANIAC fan of Spider-Man that wants things all done in his manner, how he likes them and when he wants them, or the movie is crap.
Go to the SONY headquarters, and ask them for 100Million Dollars, and show me if you can pull out a better Spider-Man or stop with your boring discussions and judgments.
Yea seriously parker do you ever shut up about the spiderman thing, can't read one of your posts without the same stupid point over and over again.
All I imagine is some little kid crying on the floor kicking his legs and repeating something about organic webbing while he accidentally pisses himself. Sorry for flaming, I do like this forum and I don't see as many flames on this forum which is why I joined but right now I think it's important to get this guy to stfu.
Btw the organics pissed me off too but I got over it, I really loved the web shooters, they are what kind of got me into spiderman in the first place. I really liked how his transition went and the grief he went through, the scene with him on the bed crying... I remembered why spidey is my fav superhero. Anyone read Madgoblin's review on spiderman movies?