|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:18:57 GMT -5
This movie has potential to not totally suck... BUT, I think it's pretty much guaranteed that if someone who isn't really a fan watches it "cold" they're going to hate the crap out of it
|
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Dec 9, 2013 13:25:32 GMT -5
Why would I regret it? I was a fan of the first two Spider-Man films.
|
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:26:57 GMT -5
Why would I regret it? I was a fan of the first two Spider-Man films. This one looks like Spider Man 3 the remake... |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:28:02 GMT -5
Why would I regret it? I was a fan of the first two Spider-Man films. This one looks like Spider Man 3 the remake... I rarely do this, but I'm with Soon. This one has a lot of the same bad signs... |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Dec 9, 2013 13:28:11 GMT -5
Oh. That bad huh?
EDIT: I did question the fact that there's three villains again. I don't know why that's the trend these days, I think the 1989 Batman film was the last one to only feature a single antagonist (to great effect, I might add).
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:29:26 GMT -5
I really want to like this movie because I really enjoyed the first one (more than any of the Toby messes, honestly), but I see so many of the same mistakes being repeated... too many villains, too much CGI, too much "escalation"... |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:30:44 GMT -5
They have the same amount of villains, both star an emo punk and Peter's friend Harry, both have/had a pretty good cast that just kind of seem off in their roles... Yeah the similarities go on and on. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:31:20 GMT -5
I really want to like this movie because I really enjoyed the first one (more than any of the Toby messes, honestly), but I see so many of the same mistakes being repeated... too many villains, too much CGI, too much "escalation"... This series went down the gutter one film ahead of the other, just saying. |
|
|
|
Post by WSS? on Dec 9, 2013 13:31:48 GMT -5
I did question the fact that there's three villains again. I don't know why that's the trend these days, I think the 1989 Batman film was the last one to only feature a single antagonist (to great effect, I might add). Avengers only had Loki. Man of Steel only had Zod. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:32:10 GMT -5
At least this time around most of the cast seems interested in being in the movie LOL
Most of the press junkets for Spider-Man 3 involved 4 of the major stars sitting around going "well, y'know, it's not the movie I would have wanted to do... but I guess some people like Spider-Man, for some reason..."
|
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:32:44 GMT -5
This one looks like Spider Man 3 the remake... I rarely do this, but I'm with Soon. What he means by this is that he rarely agrees with his intellectual superiors. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:35:06 GMT -5
I did question the fact that there's three villains again. I don't know why that's the trend these days, I think the 1989 Batman film was the last one to only feature a single antagonist (to great effect, I might add). Avengers only had Loki. Man of Steel only had Zod. The Avengers also had the Government at the end, who were minor antagonists, and the Alien race. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:36:17 GMT -5
The Chitauri, a.k.a. "We Can't Call Them Skrulls Because We Rented That Name Out Along with the Fantastic Four License."
|
|
|
|
Post by WSS? on Dec 9, 2013 13:38:10 GMT -5
I'd count them as Loki's minions, not villains themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Dec 9, 2013 13:39:13 GMT -5
I'd count them as Loki's minions, not villains themselves. They were Thanos' minions, really, but you're right in that they were ostensibly just Loki's cannon fodder within the framework of the story being told. |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:39:39 GMT -5
I'd count them as Loki's minions, not villains themselves. What about the government that decided to nuke the city? |
|
|
|
Post by WSS? on Dec 9, 2013 13:40:42 GMT -5
I'd count them as Loki's minions, not villains themselves. What about the government that decided to nuke the city? Commissioner Gordon has sent S.W.A.T. teams after Batman before, do you count him as a villain? |
|
|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Dec 9, 2013 13:44:25 GMT -5
What about the government that decided to nuke the city? Commissioner Gordon has sent S.W.A.T. teams after Batman before, do you count him as a villain? That's different. The government in that film was portrayed as antagonists, and therefore they were. In the Batman films Gordon was portrayed as a protagonist, and therefore he was. |
|
|
|
Post by WSS? on Dec 9, 2013 13:46:11 GMT -5
Commissioner Gordon has sent S.W.A.T. teams after Batman before, do you count him as a villain? That's different. The government in that film was portrayed as antagonists, and therefore they were. In the Batman films Gordon was portrayed as a protagonist, and therefore he was. ...What? They weren't antagonists, more like idiotic side characters. |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Dec 9, 2013 13:46:18 GMT -5
At least this time around most of the cast seems interested in being in the movie LOL Most of the press junkets for Spider-Man 3 involved 4 of the major stars sitting around going "well, y'know, it's not the movie I would have wanted to do... but I guess some people like Spider-Man, for some reason..." LOL that doesn't surprise me, Spider-Man 3 sucked balls and I'm glad that all those diehard fans of the first trilogy have finally been able to admit this fact. I wasn't even the greatest fan of the first one but I thought Spider-Man 2 was soundly entertaining. Even Raimi admits that he didn't like 3. Still, I'm surprised to see so much apathy for the new film, especially considering that you and many others were fans of the one that came out a couple of years ago. I watched the first fifteen minutes of Man of Steel yesterday, looked good to me. Zod seemed pretty great. |
|
