Spiderman....sucked.

Food for thought............................

Remember when you go to see your favorite comicbook hero on the big screen, somewhere in the intro, it will say that the movie is "based on" the comic book character which gives them leaway to make some things different and not worry about every nit picky detail.

I've never seen a comic book superhero's story or look translated to the bigscreen without a few changes or flaws (big rubber batsuits,Green goblin "flightsuit",Spawn necroplasmic armor, etc etc)

Originally posted by Linkalicious
those cliches are what make up comic books. "friendly neighborhood spiderman!" i just don't like how Toby Maguire hoots and hollars when he's web slinging. He should just shut up and swing.

No no no no no! Good storylines and characterisations written by killer writers are what make up comic books. Great art is what makes up comic books. A sense of history is what makes up a comic book. I swear, I will smack the next person that says that it's ok for Spider-man to be cheesy 'cause it's based on a comic.

And Daywalker, I'm not nitpicking, believe me. I understand that the movies have to change from the comics. There are some movies, like Blade, that completely change from the comics and are still awesome. And there are some, like Spider-man, that just plain suck whether they stick to the comic or not.

I'm going to have to go with VenganceGOD this time. Although I liked Spiderman it did really suck at some points. Basiclly any time Toby or Dafoe were on screen for more rhan two minutes. The Green Goblin suit was just a cheap Power Rangers ripoff and Kirsten could not act to save her life.

But on the upside it was Toby's first film he will hopefully get better, Dafoe's out and the script writers should of learned of their mistakes, so my only major gripe is the actor who plays Harry Osbourne. I mean for gods sake man he acted like he was from the Hulk movie no freaking emotion ever.

Oh just out of intrest what is the picture you're using VenganceGOD I've been trying to figure it out for a while now but no such luck. A little help here

It's not fair to compare Spiderman to Blade because the 1st Blade movie didn't re-tell the story of his origin. Spiderman seemingly sucked because they did the whole radio active spider, uncle ben dieing, green goblin story. If you think about the Spidey comics, Green Goblin was one of the stupider characters, and that's why he isn't in the comics now a days. Doc Octopus should help to create a much better movie. And dont pick on Dafoe, he did a great job on Green Goblin considering the costume he was stuck wearing.

HEY Vengence, seems like you got a huge problem with Super hero movies, hence the name "SUPER HERO MOVIES" guess what, Mr, "God" what was the hulk... the first one... what was spider man... the first one... what was daredevil... the first one... hmmm... there all first in the series... people may say the FIRST is always the best and sequels suck, WELL ITS REVERSE with these type of movies. Vengence, IT SEEMS LIKE you hate all the super hero movies, so why are you in this topic, this thread even. In my opinion, all the movies were entertaining, who gives a crap about quality, I loved em, they entertained me for a whole 2 hours.

Originally posted by SuperNova
HEY Vengence, seems like you got a huge problem with Super hero movies, hence the name "SUPER HERO MOVIES" guess what, Mr, "God" what was the hulk... the first one... what was spider man... the first one... what was daredevil... the first one... hmmm... there all first in the series... people may say the FIRST is always the best and sequels suck, WELL ITS REVERSE with these type of movies. Vengence, IT SEEMS LIKE you hate all the super hero movies, so why are you in this topic, this thread even. In my opinion, all the movies were entertaining, who gives a crap about quality, I loved em, they entertained me for a whole 2 hours.

agreed

Originally posted by VengeanceGOD
No no no no no! Good storylines and characterisations written by killer writers are what make up comic books. Great art is what makes up comic books. A sense of history is what makes up a comic book. I swear, I will smack the next person that says that it's ok for Spider-man to be cheesy 'cause it's based on a comic.

And Daywalker, I'm not nitpicking, believe me. I understand that the movies have to change from the comics. There are some movies, like Blade, that completely change from the comics and are still awesome. And there are some, like Spider-man, that just plain suck whether they stick to the comic or not.

Cliche's are a rather classic piece of most comics. Friendly neighborhood,Same Bat time,great hera, riddle me this etc........they're all parts of comic book history that cannot be denied. A comic book is meant to be a loosely written fun saga/adventure, not a graphic novel.

I agree about Blade, that movie definitely changed the daywalker character for the better. As I said earlier, Spider-Man wasn't perfect(what movie is?) but I can't see the film being crap. I thought the movie was a good step in the right direction for Marvel.

Originally posted by Lord Ryugen
I'm going to have to go with VenganceGOD this time. Although I liked Spiderman it did really suck at some points. Basiclly any time Toby or Dafoe were on screen for more rhan two minutes. The Green Goblin suit was just a cheap Power Rangers ripoff and Kirsten could not act to save her life.

You can't fault Defoe for the suit he wore and I thought he was a maniacal genious as the Goblin. The Green Goblin is supposed to be a psycho and although I didn't care for the suit, I liked when the mask lenses moved to reveal Defoe's eyes because he looked crazed(nice touch).

Originally posted by SuperNova
HEY Vengence, seems like you got a huge problem with Super hero movies, hence the name "SUPER HERO MOVIES" guess what, Mr, "God" what was the hulk... the first one... what was spider man... the first one... what was daredevil... the first one... hmmm... there all first in the series... people may say the FIRST is always the best and sequels suck, WELL ITS REVERSE with these type of movies. Vengence, IT SEEMS LIKE you hate all the super hero movies, so why are you in this topic, this thread even. In my opinion, all the movies were entertaining, who gives a crap about quality, I loved em, they entertained me for a whole 2 hours.

Wow...you have NO idea what you're talking about. I've been an avid comic book reader for as long as I can remember. I love the Marvel characters, and I've only hated two of the movies based on them, Hulk and Spiderman. The first AND second X-mens were very very good, and I really enjoyed Daredevil. Superheroes are the best kind of fiction to me, and I hate to see characters I love be ruined. Yes, these ARE the origin stories, but they don't HAVE to be bad. Have you ever read Ultimate Spider-man? If not, you should read the very beginning of it (it's called Power and Responsibility, out in Trade Paperback at most of the giant bookstores). Brian Michael Bendis retells the Spider-man origin in modern times, and it rocks. Very human, without an inch of the cheesiness that was hugely apparent in both Spider-man and Hulk movies.

I complain about Spider-man the movie, not because I hate Spider-man, but because I love him. I complain out of a real desire to see these movies do better. There have been many good comic book movies. As I mentioned, X-men, Daredevil, Blade, the first two Batmen, and the first two Supermen. The first Spider-man outing was terrible, and I sincerly hope the second one will be better. But if it's not...well, you'll be hearing from me again. 😉

I think this picture really sums it all up nicely:

I was going to say it earlier, but someone beat me to it. VengeanceGod, I agree. It is the thinking that comic books are to be fun and that comic books are cliches that actually hurt the comic book industry. Because when a sub-par movie like Spider-Man releases, and the general public likes and respects it, then they feel like they have already done it. Therein, they don't have to read the material, they are now instant experts. And nothing pisses me off more than someone saying something that is wrong and that they really know nothing about.

The movie was bad. It had nothing to do with the fact that it is an origin story, because X-Men was not an origin story and I hated that one too. The movie was badly scripted, no excuses for anyone. Look at the background for all of the people in charge of all those Marvel movies. Basically the writers and directors. Don't you think that it is important that these people have a base in comics and these characters? Apparantly the producers and Avi Arad didn't, because none of these people did. You can look at the director's commentary and features and see that Ang Lee of the Hulk was the closest. I like Spider-Man and Daredevil and I am a true fan of all the others as characters, but with the exception of the Blade movies and X2, none of them were done justice.

Originally posted by Bishop777
I was going to say it earlier, but someone beat me to it. VengeanceGod, I agree. It is the thinking that comic books are to be fun and that comic books are cliches that actually hurt the comic book industry. Because when a sub-par movie like Spider-Man releases, and the general public likes and respects it, then they feel like they have already done it. Therein, they don't have to read the material, they are now instant experts. And nothing pisses me off more than someone saying something that is wrong and that they really know nothing about.

The movie was bad. It had nothing to do with the fact that it is an origin story, because X-Men was not an origin story and I hated that one too. The movie was badly scripted, no excuses for anyone. Look at the background for all of the people in charge of all those Marvel movies. Basically the writers and directors. Don't you think that it is important that these people have a base in comics and these characters? Apparantly the producers and Avi Arad didn't, because none of these people did. You can look at the director's commentary and features and see that Ang Lee of the Hulk was the closest. I like Spider-Man and Daredevil and I am a true fan of all the others as characters, but with the exception of the Blade movies and X2, none of them were done justice.

Boy this movie surely WAS badly scripted.The script was a joke starting from the beginning of You Want to know who I am,you sure you want to know? what a joke.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
Boy this movie surely WAS badly scripted.The script was a joke starting from the beginning of You Want to know who I am,you sure you want to know? what a joke.

I didn't see anything wrong with that line, I thought it was kinda clever. He was just letting you know that his life wasn't one filled with great times and glamour. Pete's life is filled with hard times and bad luck. He always talks about how being Spider-Man is a curse.

From the outside looking in, people may think that Peter's life is an exciting one but he doesn't see it that way. I was watching the cartoon the other morning and my wife happened by and said he has to be the only hero that puts his costume on in his bedroom and I thought that was so funny.

My point, there's no fancy cave, no enterprise full of fancy metal suits and no fascinating story of how he's from a distant planet and his powers are fueled by the sun. He's just an everyday kid with everyday problems trying to make it in the world all the while trying to be a city's savior. I think all of this was translated into the movie and I rather enjoyed it. Not a perfect 5 stars but I did like it.

I understand what you are saying Daywalker, and your opinion really shows that you have an understanding of the character; but that opening line was neither clever, witty, or indicative of the character of Spider-Man. It was a corny one-liner that is a prime example of the tripe that Hollywood writers come up with when they want to make their character seemed tough. If any writer tried to put that in a Spider-Man comic book, I'm sure they would catch a lot of heat from the readers and his/her peers.

Why is exactly that these filmmakers cannot come up with a script on-par with the good comic book scripts? Why is it that no major comic book writer has been accosted for any movie scripts as of now or for the future? These producers show no respect to anyone when they approach the films in the manner that they do.

To the fans, they say they will make what they want and we'll like it. To the progenitors (Stan Lee), they say shutup, take your cameo and royalty check, and get out of my face. To the writers and artists, past and present, they say yeah your stories are good for your little kiddie book, but you and your stories won't fly on the big screen. And finally to Spider-Man, they say that he isn't interesting enough to pass off to the public as-is; what can we do as people that no nothing about the character to make him better.

I've said it once and now i've said it again. Spiderman was an intoduction to the world just like x men 1. They both had good and bad points. In x men 2 we knew the world and the characters so there was more time for a decent story and action and it was an overall better movie. This is probably gonna happen in spiderman 2. All newbies know what it about now so a better story can be told.

And Doc Oc should be a really cool villian if he uses his tentacles all the time. If/When they choose to do Spiderman 3, I hope they stick with the 1 bad guy trend. Adding 2 bad guys per movie like the Batman Series made it kinda corny. So hopefully Spidey 3 won't have Rhino or Vulture because those are 2 weak ass characters. I'm truly hoping for Venom because i think he can hold his pwn for a whole movie, and it'd be cool to see some kinda chase seen where Venom is like swinging after Spidey in Down Town and Spidey is trying his best to get away.

Originally posted by BarmyBrummie
I've said it once and now i've said it again. Spiderman was an intoduction to the world just like x men 1. They both had good and bad points. In x men 2 we knew the world and the characters so there was more time for a decent story and action and it was an overall better movie. This is probably gonna happen in spiderman 2. All newbies know what it about now so a better story can be told.

as long as sony is producing it,dont count on it.

I think the idea of the sequal makes perfect sense. They did the first movie the way they did so they would not have to cover origns later. It makes expandinf Spider-Man's world in sequals much easier.

Stan Lee should really hang his head in shame for endorsing this movie;
Spiderman and The Hulk were just about pick up the money and run for stan lee and all involved. The casting really was weak to say the least;
Tobey Maguire as Spiderman did not work, he basically managed to look like a twelve-year old Peter Parker (so they've scrapped any chance of making 'Spider Man Jnr' ). Kirsten Dunst was too sappy as Mary Jane Watson- the kind of acting that you seriously do not believe in. That Guy as Harry Osbourne(I don't really want to know who he is) was just terrible at developing any substance to the character(or emotion, or any acting ability) Willem Dafoe as the Norman Osbourne was just criminal. For that entire film he couldn't actually manage to move his face he was that wooden and non-existent.
The goblin suit was terrible, it actually induced me into fits of hysterical laughter when I seen it - Sam Raimi and his costume designers watch too many cheap teenage flicks like Power Rangers, BeetleBorgs etc

😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Stan Lee should really hang his head in shame for endorsing this movie;
Spiderman and The Hulk were just about pick up the money and run for stan lee and all involved. The casting really was weak to say the least;
Tobey Maguire as Spiderman did not work, he basically managed to look like a twelve-year old Peter Parker (so they've scrapped any chance of making 'Spider Man Jnr' ). Kirsten Dunst was too sappy as Mary Jane Watson- the kind of acting that you seriously do not believe in. That Guy as Harry Osbourne(I don't really want to know who he is) was just terrible at developing any substance to the character(or emotion, or any acting ability) Willem Dafoe as the Norman Osbourne was just criminal. For that entire film he couldn't actually manage to move his face he was that wooden and non-existent.
The goblin suit was terrible, it actually induced me into fits of hysterical laughter when I seen it - Sam Raimi and his costume designers watch too many cheap teenage flicks like Power Rangers, BeetleBorgs etc

😆 😆 😆 😆 😆

I thought Tobey was an okay Peter,Just not good as spider-man.He didnt sound at all the way you would imiagine spider-man to sound.The way he spoke in the 90's toon,now THAT was spidey.William Defoe was a good Norman Osborn,but his performance was wooden like you said and hampered because of that horrible and laughable looking alien from outer space goblin costume with no mouth movement.It was like a ventriliguist show or something.People laughed at that costume. 😆 😆 😆

my mom says all the cool kids watch beetleborgs!!! And i agree with Mr Parker on William Dafoe. he was good as norman osborne, but the costume killed the character. I still think he delivered the line "i'll get you spiderman" or was it "you haven't seen the last of me Spiderman" really well. He has a great manical voice, too bad his costume was so much of a joke. Well atleast they kept the Green Goblin green....I guess.