I've read nearly this entire thread... Ugghhh. My eyes burn, but I made it to here... I like to think that there is a movie universe and a comic book universe. They simply interpreted the comic book universe into the movie universe. Its done that way ever since the first one! Its the same way with novels. Movies are never going to be as good as books in general, you get so much more information from a book than a movie. The movies did their best and made plenty of money, and plenty of people accepted the changes as they were. I didn't like the idea of the organic webbing, but it made sense in the movie universe, which was an interpretation of the comic book universe, not an exact translation. I love how the comics are getting mainstreamed though, its hitting a bigger audience and the movies are part of it! I'm happy about the comic book movies... That's just my 2 cents, take it or leave it...
__________________ Witness the power of the human spirit in Clashing Forces - Reclamation! A novel by Wesley Belk (that's me!) Here's a sneak peek of the book! The power of the Human Spirit should never be underestimated!Clashing Forces Check the site out for more details!
Yes, little plot-line, implausible plots 'disney movie' story-lines (a demon called Domambu from another world and MJ and Green Goblin falling through a portal to another world, wtf!?) two-dimensional characters, and no character development made that HEAVILY censored children's TV show much better than the movies :rolleyes1:
The Spider-Man movies have thick plot-lines, a kind of real-world feel to it, in-depth personalities to all the characters, different aspects of the characters, violence, great action sequences, and great character development.
So please explain how they cartoon series was better. Because it had the web-shooters? Not good enough. Once AGAIN you have been proven wrong and try to make you statements so black and white. Just because you didn't like the movie, doesn't mean it's a bad movie.
Can't you just grow up and say "It wasn't a bad movie, I just didn't like it, it's not the sought of movie for me, I'll go put on my Little Mermaid DVD..."
Instead of crying like a three year-old girl and slagging a great movie that a lot of people put a lot of hard work into?
The organic webbing was a minor change. I think it's an excellent change. I loved it. Before I saw the movie I thought "I can't believe he has webshooters, that is so stupid!" Then saw the movie and thought "He had organic webbing, that is so cool and makes this character even better and more interesting!!!"
I don't see how web-shooters destroyed his character like you said it did. It wasn't the web shooters that did this. It was bringing this character to the big screen, treating him like a real person. A comic-book character is usually unrealistic and two-dimensional.
There are no 'true' Spider-Man fans. Liking the web-shooters doesn't make you a true fan, it makes you a comic-book fan.
It was only retarded fans that cried over the organic webbing. They wanted the unplausible fantasy world movie where an 18 year-old is the smartest kid on Earth and has managed to make a substance that is imensley strong and hardens then evaporates after an hour, and a mechanism to fire it out of.
I like my movies to have a real-world basis to them. Not some fantasy crap like the web-shooters.
Actually, a magazine did a pole on the Spider-Man movies and found that a large chuck of the movie's success was contributed by fans in their twenties.
Mr Parker, I have a question for you, don't you get tired of being wrong?
I bet your next post will be a statement trying to be-little all my posts and you'll try to find some pathetic loop-hole in my reasoning and cling to that for dear life. Why don't you make some valid points for once?
You are implying that it made a lot of money because people didn't know what to expect from it because there had never been a Spider-Man movie before but after seeing it thought it was a terrible movie.
If this were true the second would have bombed. The sequel broke it's proceeders' opening day record. The second was a smash-hit at the box-office, so obviously these movies have been a huge success because people ENJOY them.
By the way, Spider-Man 3 will NOT be a kiddie movie.
Having a guy push his girlfriend to the floor, pin his collegue up against the wall, and throw a pumpkin bomb at his best friend's face is not what I call a kid's movie. Not to mention Venom, a big giant monster with razor sharp teeth and big claws and a massive tounge.
You're implying this hasn't been shown in this movie. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think I remember Norman beating the shit out of Spider-Man, Doc Ock kicking his ass, not to mention Spider-Man barely even hurts Sandman until he gets the black suit.
[QUOTE=5190142]Originally posted by Silverstein
[B]tobey mcguire and dunst were probably the hottest celebs at the time.
WTF!!!!!!!!! Are you serious!!!!??? MaGuire was UNKNOWN at the time. They only movies he had really been in were Pleasantville, Cider House Rules, and a few others. None of them huge successes.
Jesus H. Christ...the level of stupidity in these posts is mind-boggiling...
Wrong. Webbing shoots out of a Spider's abdomen because that's the strongest part of it's body. Our strongest part of our bodies are our arms, so naturally webbing would come out of his arms. Quite logical really...
Our artieries have blood running through them at an extremly high pressure, yet they still manage. A tube running from his web glands to the cut in his wrists could easily withstand the pressure.
*Touches arm* Ouch! It burns!!!!! I'm on fire today...
KMC Community Forums
Nov 16th, 2006 06:27 PM
