|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 2, 2014 22:31:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 2, 2014 22:35:43 GMT -5
Jamie Foxx looks RIDICULOUS. I mean, unforgivably stupid. And don't even get me started on his Baleman impression.
That said, I actually think this is tied with Winter Soldier for "potentially the best super hero movie on the horizon"... since most of the other upcoming stuff is going to suck completely.
|
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 2, 2014 22:37:38 GMT -5
I like the Electro look, lol. I think we've talked about that before though.
|
|
|
|
Post by WSS? on Feb 2, 2014 22:38:52 GMT -5
I think he's talking about the special effects (Which are awful).
|
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 2, 2014 22:41:26 GMT -5
I like the way they look, lol. The whole thing is special effects....
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 2, 2014 22:43:11 GMT -5
I think he's talking about the special effects (Which are awful). Exactly. I didn't hate them in the stills (we DID talk about this before). They look terrible in motion. |
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 2, 2014 22:46:10 GMT -5
To be fair, I can't watch the videos because of lack of internet.....so I'm still talking about the stills, not videos, lol.
|
|
Rush
Jobber
RONDA ROUSEY IS THE WORST HUMAN BEING ON THE PLANET
Posts: 2,486 
|
Post by Rush on Feb 2, 2014 22:48:36 GMT -5
It's really cgish in motion. Not the best work but this does look promising. Can't wait to see more of giamanti
|
|
|
|
Post by pinksparklepuff on Feb 3, 2014 0:37:42 GMT -5
All the villains look unforgivingly stupid. Let's not pick on the blue guy, you racist jerk!
I'm a bit disappointed to see they decided to make Spider-Man a big time super celebrity.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for a Spider-Bat, but the public scrutiny of the character is one of my favorite, and one of Spidey's greatest, elements.
Without it, without the constant humility and frustration and near anger, Spider Man can only be so much of the endearing icon that he is in the hearts of a comic fan.
The outsider knows the mask. The geek knows the man.
|
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 3, 2014 5:51:35 GMT -5
Although I am usually a fan of CGI.....
That Electro does look horrible in those videos, I've just seen them.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 3, 2014 6:47:20 GMT -5
All the villains look unforgivingly stupid. Let's not pick on the blue guy, you racist jerk! I'm a bit disappointed to see they decided to make Spider-Man a big time super celebrity. Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking for a Spider-Bat, but the public scrutiny of the character is one of my favorite, and one of Spidey's greatest, elements. Without it, without the constant humility and frustration and near anger, Spider Man can only be so much of the endearing icon that he is in the hearts of a comic fan. The outsider knows the mask. The geek knows the man. I don't know about that; Spider-Man has always gone through periods of intense popularity. It's what sets him up for the emotional roller coaster when the New Yorkers inevitably turn on him. |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Feb 3, 2014 6:56:32 GMT -5
Eh, no one thing about the trailers look especially crappy to me. The whole thing looks like a big uninspired bore, leaving me with pretty much the same feeling I got after watching the trailers for the first of the new Spider-Man films (which I never bothered to watch). Nothing looks terrible to me, all of it just looks equally meh.
If anything I come away from these scenes thinking how pretty boy dopey the Spider-Man actor looks and the fact that I want to touch Emma Stone inappropriately.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 3, 2014 7:04:00 GMT -5
I actually enjoyed the first one. Admittedly, it might just be because the Toby Maguire movies were SO bad that it was good to see anything else, but I REALLY wanted to hate that movie because I want Sony to revert the license back to Disney/Marvel... and I couldn't. I thought it was very well done. There is something to the notion that instead of being a traditional "nerd" as in the canon, this version of Parker is more of an emo who kind of deserves to be an outcast by dint of being obnoxiously self-absorbed, but IMO that also works for a "first movie" version. We'll see where he goes in the upcoming films. Peter Parker has hardly been "geeky" in the comics for years anyway. Modern Peter Parker (before his body was hijacked by Doc Ock) is confident, highly intelligent, and has a list of "female companions" longer than my arm. Here is an image that is pretty representative of the way Parker has typically been drawn since the late 1980's. IMO, no less a "pretty boy" than Garfield.  |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Feb 3, 2014 7:11:22 GMT -5
Yeah, that's a fair comparison. I still see more geek than fey Twihard bait, but I definitely see a resemblance.
Maybe it's because I was never into the comic or maybe it's because it's now passe to be a fan of the Maguire movies but what can I say, they struck me as more compelling than the new franchise. I feel that I already got all the Spidey I needed from Spider-Man 2, maybe half of Spider-Man 1, and ten to fifteen percent of Spider-Man 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 3, 2014 7:13:08 GMT -5
I like movies that sway away from the actual comic books while simultaneously kind of follow them. I think Amazing Spider-man was a great movie though.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 3, 2014 7:14:55 GMT -5
Well if the argument is that the reboot is totally unnecessary; given. It happened because Sony needed to do it to retain the rights to the character, and for no other reason. That's why I was so surprised at the quality of the story the first movie told.
I liked Spider-Man 2 and the first one was alright, but 3 was terrible... but in retrospect the lack of interest in the material really killed the performances in all of those movies, for me anyway. Three of the leads felt they were too good to be in the movies at all, and you could really tell. The fact that Raimi went all-out COMIC BOOK! for them was great, I'm sick of Hollywood trying to "grit" up comic book licenses... but the fact that the people playing Parker, MJ, and Harry wanted to be in a serious dramatic movie crapped all over that vibe.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 3, 2014 7:16:10 GMT -5
I like movies that sway away from the actual comic books while simultaneously kind of follow them. I think Amazing Spider-man was a great movie though. I generally strongly dislike deviations from canon, I feel like it's an enormous violation of the very things they're using to get me to buy their product in the first place.... but by your own standard, of course TASM was a great movie. It deviated WILDLY from the canon. |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Feb 3, 2014 7:18:37 GMT -5
Well if the argument is that the reboot is totally unnecessary; given. It happened because Sony needed to do it to retain the rights to the character, and for no other reason. That's why I was so surprised at the quality of the story the first movie told. I liked Spider-Man 2 and the first one was alright, but 3 was terrible... but in retrospect the lack of interest in the material really killed the performances in all of those movies, for me anyway. Three of the leads felt they were too good to be in the movies at all, and you could really tell. The fact that Raimi went all-out COMIC BOOK! for them was great, I'm sick of Hollywood trying to "grit" up comic book licenses... but the fact that the people playing Parker, MJ, and Harry wanted to be in a serious dramatic movie crapped all over that vibe. I'd heard the reboot explanation before and understand the logic of it, even if the end result strikes me as kind of silly and redundant. Generally though I agree with pretty much all of these sentiments. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 3, 2014 7:23:02 GMT -5
When Marvel made the deal, they fully expected Sony to make 4 or 5 movies and then let the license revert. The notion that you could churn out a new movie every 5 years or so and keep enough interest (Sony doesn't just have to make theatrical releases, they have to make a minimum amount of money as well...) must have seemed impossible. But then the "fantasy movie boom" happened (in part, BECAUSE of Spider-Man 2), and here we are, in a market where you can successfully reboot a successful movie series 4 years later.
My one hope in all of this is that they get the Venom story right before they reboot again. Venom is one of my favorite all time comic characters, and Spider-Man 3 did him no justice at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by BaneTheDestroyer on Feb 3, 2014 7:29:55 GMT -5
I like movies that sway away from the actual comic books while simultaneously kind of follow them. I think Amazing Spider-man was a great movie though. I generally strongly dislike deviations from canon, I feel like it's an enormous violation of the very things they're using to get me to buy their product in the first place.... but by your own standard, of course TASM was a great movie. It deviated WILDLY from the canon. Honestly, the reason I like it that way, is because of this reason; I've already read the canon in the comic books, I want to have something different, especially since movies are generally meant to be from a completely different universe than the comic books. Alternate universes are used mainly to tell a similar story in a whole new way. I even liked the Daredevil movie somewhat. I did hate the Bullseye in that movie tremendously though. SN: I don't blame Ben Affleck for that movie sucking neither. |
|
