NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey everybody on the board! It's good to be here!

Who here has seen either/both of the Spiderman films (as in the most recent ones)?

I had personally seen both. I'm surprised that MJ finds out Peter Parker = Spiderman this late in the 2nd movie. I like where it is going though, but Kirsten Dunst has only signed-on for 3 movies, so chances are 3rd will be her last as MJ. How do you think they'd get rid of MJ in 2007, when Spiderman 3 comes out?

JiangGuo

No, probably not, they'll probably just renegotiate the contract.

*big spoiler*
i didnt think the second was very good (first was even worse), i hated the ending, and i was going to kill someone if i saw one more bloody american flag, the action was good, special affects were much better then the first, good philosophy, but everyone finding out he is spiderman and mj being with him at the end was very bad
maybe venom or lizard will kill her
kirstan dunst (whatever her name is) was a bad choice for her anyway

No, probably not, they'll probably just renegotiate the contract.

While I don't know where the exact quote is from, but Kirsten Dunst has stated explicitly on print she doesn't want to be in more than 3 spiderman movies. Sad but true.

JiangGuo

The second show ruled as far as fight scenes go. The Spidey/Doc Ock fight was standard comic book-style slugfest. Two super-types smashing each other into stuff, practically wrecking their entire surroundings. I'm not too fond of Kirsten as MJ (or for any other reason), so I won't miss her. She doesn't look the part, for one... Mary Jane Watson is a knockout model, and Miss Dunst is not a knockout. Sorry. And since they colored her hair for the part, ANYONE could've been a better MJ.

I loved the comic book references in Spider-Man 2: JJJ referring to Doctor Strange (another Marvel movie rumored to be on the drawing board), Spidey walking away from the costume (taken from the classic John Romita cover), Spidey holding up the wall so MJ wouldn't get crushed (although that one was swiped from a scene that didn't have MJ in it...), and at the end when MJ said "Go get 'em, tiger" (that's been her little pet name for Peter for years).

I loved it.


Greywollffe has spoken...


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

I loved both of the Spider-man movies. I don't know how the third one can possibly get any better.

I thought there was supposed to be only 3 movies from the start.

Anyone but Vulture for the next villain. Venom could be used if they wanted a scary gothic feel to the movie (a la Batman/Gotham City), since Venom is a psychotic individual. But I think I have a clue, and a very obvious one at that, about which villain could be in Spider-Man 3: Professor Curtis Conners... For anyone not familiar with the character, Curt Conners is the human alter-ego of the Lizard. That would be another way to have a gothic feel in the movie, since the Lizard hates humans. He'd be a rampaging beast that would disappear when he reverted to the one-armed doctor. Then again, even this clue is only a speculation on my part, as I'm sure they're going to have Harry Osborn become Green Goblin II. That approach, to me at least, seems ridiculous. Having, effectively, the same character return to fight Spidey makes the movie redundant. I truly hope they don't go that route. If they're not going to do Lizard or Goblin II, I'd love to see either Chameleon, Sandman, or Mysterio (minus that damned fishbowl on his head).

And while we're on the comics train, I'd love to see (although this is just wishfull thinking on my part) another Hulk film with Leader and Abomination as the villains. Anyway, on to the next topic...


Greywollffe has spoken...


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

Then again, even this clue is only a speculation on my part, as I'm sure they're going to have Harry Osborn become Green Goblin II. That approach, to me at least, seems ridiculous. Having, effectively, the same character return to fight Spidey makes the movie redundant. I truly hope they don't go that route. If they're not going to do Lizard or Goblin II, I'd love to see either Chameleon, Sandman, or Mysterio (minus that damned fishbowl on his head).

And while we're on the comics train, I'd love to see (although this is just wishfull thinking on my part) another Hulk film with Leader and Abomination as the villains. Anyway, on to the next topic...


Greywollffe has spoken...


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

you mean hobgoblin, not green goblin 2

and hulk2 would be good too, but they would need ang lee again

Not Hobgoblin, that was Roderick Kingsley (originally, everyone thought Ned Leeds was Hobgoblin). He was a knockoff of the Green Goblin, although better than his predecessor (the Hobgoblin is friggin' awesome). Harry knew his father was the Goblin [u]before[/] he died, by the way, and removed his costume so no one would know his father's dark secret. They didn't do it that way in the movie, though, so the angry young man who lost his father blames the hero. Same crap with the bridge scene: in the comics, the Goblin dropped Gwen Stacy off the bridge, not Mary Jane Watson. The majority of the movie crowd is too young to remember her, so they had to use someone the under-20 audience would recognize.



Greywollffe has spoken...


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

It would take 2 hours of backstory to get the symbiote on Spiderman, then off him, then on Venom, if they wanted to use Venom. It'll probably be Lizard or Green Goblin II in Spiderman 3, because those are the two they blatently set up.

sorry, i was wrong, but that is how they might do it in the movie, because people get bored very quickly and dont like to see the same thing so they may make harry the hobgoblin

IMHO, they should just throw out the Green Goblin or any variation of him. Give us VENOM AND LIZARD! The Lizard has been set-up by the writers (in Peter's reference's to Dr. Connors who in the comic book series become) but I read in Empire Magazine that the director of Spider-man 3 don't think they can make Venom in Spidey-3. Too bad.

JiangGuo

Hey everybody on the board! It's good to be here!

Who here has seen either/both of the Spiderman films (as in the most recent ones)?

I had personally seen both. I'm surprised that MJ finds out Peter Parker = Spiderman this late in the 2nd movie. I like where it is going though, but Kirsten Dunst has only signed-on for 3 movies, so chances are 3rd will be her last as MJ. How do you think they'd get rid of MJ in 2007, when Spiderman 3 comes out?

JiangGuo

I saw the first one - well, I watched it for about 45 minutes and gave up on it. Amazing that it is one of the highest grossing movies of all time.

It's been so long since I saw it, I can't remember: isn't it supposed to be set in NYC? What made me laugh about this was how politically-correct it was. Spiderman goes around the city taking care of the criminal element, nearly all of whom are white. Anyone who has ever lived in NYC or any big multi-racial city should be able to see this as Hollywood liberalism in action. All the criminals are white! And if they aren't white, then they must have some genuine reason for committing crime - poverty, repression, "racism" and so forth. They are never *really* to blame. Oh well!

I saw the first one - well, I watched it for about 45 minutes and gave up on it. Amazing that it is one of the highest grossing movies of all time.

It's been so long since I saw it, I can't remember: isn't it supposed to be set in NYC? What made me laugh about this was how politically-correct it was. Spiderman goes around the city taking care of the criminal element, nearly all of whom are white. Anyone who has ever lived in NYC or any big multi-racial city should be able to see this as Hollywood liberalism in action. All the criminals are white! And if they aren't white, then they must have some genuine reason for committing crime - poverty, repression, "racism" and so forth. They are never *really* to blame. Oh well!

Why do you have to drag that crap in here?

Why do you have to drag that crap in here?

Doesn't the truth hurt sometimes? Was it your favorite movie? Awwwwww. So sorry.

?The next one will be it. I?m only contracted to 3 and don?t see myself signing for a 4th or a 5th,? says Dunst, emphatically.

"I don't know what will happen in the third movie. I hope she (Mary Jane Watson) doesn't die. I just think that's kind of an obvious way to go; we have to end it, so
let's just kill her. I just think three's a good number. Mary Jane is a huge, important piece of this film as it's all about the love story. How many movies can you really make about it before you want to stop it while it's still great? You don't want to keep going."

-Source, Moviehole.net http://www.moviehole.net/news/3804.html

That was Kirsten Dunst talking about how she's not doing Spiderman 4, and I think she letting on that MJ dies in Spiderman 3. Imagine that, Kirsten's very first death scene. It's gotta be a significant scene since MJ is a pretty major character in the Spiderman movie franchise, so this is my two cents on what I think is going to happen.

After the fatal injury is inflicted on MJ, the villian temporary leaves the scene (or is suitably distracted) so that Peter and her can have the last words. Predictably she just tells him how much he loves him. MJ dies (*Dramatic music*). We hear Parker's narrative of that ever-present line "No matter what I do, its the ones I love that get hurt.". Maybe Spidey will throw in a mad howl, then he goes on a mad path of revenge.

JiangGuo

Doesn't the truth hurt sometimes? Was it your favorite movie? Awwwwww. So sorry.

No, I'm talking about your rant about the white criminals.

Who cares, it's just a damn movie, it doesn't require a rant about how much crime is caused by minorities.

Mary Jane needs to grow a backbone before the third movie. She wines entirely too much for a character that was supposed to be strong-willed.

It's been so long since I saw it, I can't remember: isn't it supposed to be set in NYC? What made me laugh about this was how politically-correct it was. Spiderman goes around the city taking care of the criminal element, nearly all of whom are white. Anyone who has ever lived in NYC or any big multi-racial city should be able to see this as Hollywood liberalism in action. All the criminals are white! And if they aren't white, then they must have some genuine reason for committing crime - poverty, repression, "racism" and so forth. They are never *really* to blame. Oh well!


You managed to drag politics into a Spiderman movie thread. :(

What you said was not true, in Spiderman 1 just before the infamous wet blouse/upside down kiss. MJ was assaulted by a group of rapists/muggers, one of which looked something other than white.

JiangGuo

No, I'm talking about your rant about the white criminals.

Who cares, it's just a damn movie, it doesn't require a rant about how much crime is caused by minorities.

That's a really superficial reply. Don't you know millions and millions of people watched this movie and are influenced by what they see? Liberalism criminalizes white people and lets minorities have a free ride? Come on now, be realistic. It may be a trashy movie but there's always a political context and a subtext to every movie, no matter how bad. Think about it...

That's a really superficial reply. Don't you know millions and millions of people watched this movie and are influenced by what they see? Liberalism criminalizes white people and lets minorities have a free ride? Come on now, be realistic. It may be a trashy movie but there's always a political context and a subtext to every movie, no matter how bad. Think about it...

My point was, this was a discussion about the movie, and you dragged politics into it.

It's obvious all you really want to do here is tell people how much you hate black people. Just go start a thread devoted to that. Then threads like this can remain at peace.

You managed to drag politics into a Spiderman movie thread. :(

What you said was not true, in Spiderman 1 just before the infamous wet blouse/upside down kiss. MJ was assaulted by a group of rapists/muggers, one of which looked something other than white.

JiangGuo

"One of which looked something other than white"? Big deal. This is after we see practically all the crime in the city caused by white people. This is so far removed from reality that it makes me wonder why white people watch this racist crap.

I guess it's due to the great special effects, because the storyline was puerile. Maybe it says something about the increasing childishness and political illiteracy of Americans. If the special effects are good enough and the script acceptable, then they ignore all the political-correctness regarding race, ethnicity, and gender, or rather don't notice it. Truly sad.

My point was, this was a discussion about the movie, and you dragged politics into it.

It's obvious all you really want to do here is tell people how much you hate black people. Just go start a thread devoted to that. Then threads like this can remain at peace.

But I thought you were the one who loathed black people?

Insane Troll, just to add that anything posted in General can be replied to in any way whatsover, within reason.

Don't try to censor those you disagree with. As the English say, it's not good form, and you should know better ;)

I'm sorry, I violated the "Don't feed the trolls" rule.

I stop now.

I'm sorry, I violated the "Don't feed the trolls" rule.

I stop now.

Damn, you're so right. Me too!

Don't feed the trolls. You can continue to post your opinions here if you like (not that we can stop you - yet) but we just won't respond to your provocation.

JiangGuo

"One of which looked something other than white"? Big deal. This is after we see practically all the crime in the city caused by white people. This is so far removed from reality that it makes me wonder why white people watch this racist crap.

I guess it's due to the great special effects, because the storyline was puerile. Maybe it says something about the increasing childishness and political illiteracy of Americans. If the special effects are good enough and the script acceptable, then they ignore all the political-correctness regarding race, ethnicity, and gender, or rather don't notice it. Truly sad.

Wow, way to suck all the fun out of something. Tell me, do you go around kicking puppies and popping little children's balloons?

*big spoiler*
i didnt think the second was very good (first was even worse), i hated the ending, and i was going to kill someone if i saw one more bloody american flag, the action was good, special affects were much better then the first, good philosophy, but everyone finding out he is spiderman and mj being with him at the end was very bad
maybe venom or lizard will kill her
kirstan dunst (whatever her name is) was a bad choice for her anyway

She's good, nice, cute, pretty, but Laura Prepon should have been cast as Mary Jane.

- Dru

What they REALLY need to do is exploit their past strengths within this new media: crossovers! Spiderman + Daredevil vs. the Punisher ...after which they all join to fight some evil mobster type... Silvermane would be cool. Hulk plus Dr. Strange (after his debut) and intoducing the Sub Mariner (yes, the Defenders), against Dormammu... the FF (after their debut) plus the X-Men vs. the evil triumverate of Dr. Doom, Magneto and Hello Kitty... the possibilities are endless!!!



- Dru

What they REALLY need to do is exploit their past strengths within this new media: crossovers! Spiderman + Daredevil vs. the Punisher ...after which they all join to fight some evil mobster type... Silvermane would be cool. Hulk plus Dr. Strange (after his debut) and intoducing the Sub Mariner (yes, the Defenders), against Dormammu... the FF (after their debut) plus the X-Men vs. the evil triumverate of Dr. Doom, Magneto and Hello Kitty... the possibilities are endless!!!



- Dru

Please no *fakingly begs*...*croak, struggling for breath as if being strangled*no....crossovers.

*dies, two paramedics take me away*
JiangGuo

I never thought I'd have a resort to this to keep a thread going.

Bump!

What they REALLY need to do is exploit their past strengths within this new media: crossovers! Spiderman\0\05{\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0e Punisher ...after which they all join to fight some evil mobster type... Silvermane would be cool. Hulk plus Dr. Strange (after his debut) and intoducing the Sub Mariner (yes, the Defenders), against Dormammu... the FF (after their debut) plus the X-Men vs. the evil triumverate of Dr. Doom, Magneto and Hello Kitty... the possibilities are endless!!!



- Dru
Quite dancing around the subject, you know what you want-SECRET WARS:THE MOVIE!!!!

Anyone else remeber that live action spin-off that never took of the justice league from the Adam West Batman? I like sharing scars.

"One of which looked something other than white"? Big deal. This is after we see practically all the crime in the city caused by white people. This is so far removed from reality that it makes me wonder why white people watch this racist crap.

I guess it's due to the great special effects, because the storyline was puerile. Maybe it says something about the increasing childishness and political illiteracy of Americans. If the special effects are good enough and the script acceptable, then they ignore all the political-correctness regarding race, ethnicity, and gender, or rather don't notice it. Truly sad.
Another Stretch Armstrong Award winner. Spidey fights very little street crime, he fights mad scientists. If you are going to argue that most mad scientists are black, go ahead. Good luck. But the truth of the matter is that. Spiderman-a guy who rather than getting cancer from a radioactive spider gets super powers, fights mad scientists. Hardly enough screen time to satisfy anyones demographic nit picking about street crime.

As someone who spent his college life finding little things like what you where attempting to imply in Spiderman (and now someone who grades those efforts) I give you a D. Try harder.

?The next one will be it. I?m only contracted to 3 and don?t see myself signing for a 4th or a 5th,? says Dunst, emphatically.

"I don't know what will happen in the third movie. I hope she (Mary Jane Watson) doesn't die. I just think that's kind of an obvious way to go; we have to end it, so
let's just kill her. I just think three's a good number. Mary Jane is a huge, important piece of this film as it's all about the love story. How many movies can you really make about it before you want to stop it while it's still great? You don't want to keep going."

-Source, Moviehole.net http://www.moviehole.net/news/3804.html

That was Kirsten Dunst talking about how she's not doing Spiderman 4, and I think she letting on that MJ dies in Spiderman 3. Imagine that, Kirsten's very first death scene. It's gotta be a significant scene since MJ is a pretty major character in the Spiderman movie franchise, so this is my two cents on what I think is going to happen.

After the fatal injury is inflicted on MJ, the villian temporary leaves the scene (or is suitably distracted) so that Peter and her can have the last words. Predictably she just tells him how much he loves him. MJ dies (*Dramatic music*). We hear Parker's narrative of that ever-present line "No matter what I do, its the ones I love that get hurt.". Maybe Spidey will throw in a mad howl, then he goes on a mad path of revenge.

JiangGuo
This is all the more reason that they should have made Dunst Gwen Stacey and not MJ, Stacey dies and it has a massive impact on Parker's life and the way he approaches being a hero. (old schoolers might remember that when the Ghost Rider hits Spidey with the hellfire, it is the guilt over Stacey's death that reduces Parker to jelly. It would have been the worst case of hellfore burn if it weren't for Parker's then developed sense of responsibility that allowed him to recover......Alright, look-I'm an old-school Spiderman and Ghost Rider fan. It doesn't mean I should have to give any of you my lunch money........)

All right--I finally saw it last night and was pretty impressed, but I've got a question. My g/f and I are arguing over whether or not Doc Ock dies in the film. I say yes, but that it was sufficiently ambiguous that he could potentially make a comeback (the arms wouldn't let him die or something liek that). I'm basing this on the redemptive turn he takes at the end, and his statement "I will not die a monster" means to me that he's willing to sacrifice himself for the good of mankind a la Samson pulling down the temple on both himself and the Philistines.

My g/f argues that he's making a statement of intent--that he'll certainly survive because he is currently a monster and so his only option is to find a way to become human again. It's not completely clear if Doc Ock has drowned in that scene--thus the ambiguity.

Curious as to everyone's feelings on this.

All right--I finally saw it last night and was pretty impressed, but I've got a question. My g/f and I are arguing over whether or not Doc Ock dies in the film. I say yes, but that it was sufficiently ambiguous that he could potentially make a comeback (the arms wouldn't let him die or something liek that). I'm basing this on the redemptive turn he takes at the end, and his statement "I will not die a monster" means to me that he's willing to sacrifice himself for the good of mankind a la Samson pulling down the temple on both himself and the Philistines.

My g/f argues that he's making a statement of intent--that he'll certainly survive because he is currently a monster and so his only option is to find a way to become human again. It's not completely clear if Doc Ock has drowned in that scene--thus the ambiguity.

Curious as to everyone's feelings on this.
I think in essense you are both right. In comic books, unless you examine the corpse, get seven references of verification and then publicly cremate the remains, desolve the ashes in acid and then send the acid into the sun, no one is completely dead, and even in the above scenario there is doubt.

The Samson argument I think is far closer to the thematic intent of the movie, that we are only monstrous by our actions. If the arms make Ock monstrous, then Spidey could be considered monstrous. But what Ock sees in Parker's face (since, apparently in this movie they decided to just tell everybody......I even got the impression that Aunt May knew for christsake...) is that it isn't the condition that makes the monster, its the action.

That is a struggle young Harry will face as well. Is Spiderman a monster for having killed his father, or he a monster for what he did, or does one not excuse the other.

See, it's these things that make Spiderman the best frickin' super-hero in the world. What complexity in a 'kids' story-worthy of shakespeare.....(no I'm not comparing it really to shakespeare, calm down potential freak out-ers...)

Oh, I'd certainly argue that Lee is the imaginative equivalent of Shakespeare, if not his equal in execution. Shakespeare had his stinkers as well--I think King John is utterly unreadable. What Lee decided all those many years ago was to include adult themes in comics, and when he stopped writing, to require the same sorts of themes from the people who took over, and then gave them their head and let them expand the myth.

Oh, I'd certainly argue that Lee is the imaginative equivalent of Shakespeare, if not his equal in execution. Shakespeare had his stinkers as well--I think King John is utterly unreadable. What Lee decided all those many years ago was to include adult themes in comics, and when he stopped writing, to require the same sorts of themes from the people who took over, and then gave them their head and let them expand the myth.
A friend of mine had told me an ancedote about an argument that he had with someone that the title didn't matter, so he went out and created the cheesiest title he could think of and gave it a good story (I believe that was Nick Fury, Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D., but I could be wrong.). I don't know if he could be considered to have won that argument.....

I love Lee, I grew up on his books, even in the Claremont dominated days of my actual reading I went back to a lot of the seventies titles like Ghost Rider and the emotional complexity was fantastic. The fights almost where disapointing because the drama was being interupted. Series like Fearfull Symatry(sp) from Spiderman and Born Again from Daredevil-such great examples of what can be done with the form. I'm glad that some of that is bleeding into the Marvel films today.

I am trepidacious(I probably shouldn't use words I can't spell, but oh well...) about the upcoming (2005) Ghost Rider movie. In the good column it is Johnny Blaze and I think that Nick Cage could be a good Blaze (and apparently he is a hard core fan, which might mean he'll protect the character). In the bad column, it is written by the guy who wrote Simon Birch, butchering one of the most simple and beautiful stories from A Prayer for Owen Meany. If I can feel that way about a book essentially about faith, that should be a testiment to how good it was and how crappy the butchering was. Basically it indicates that the adaptor is willing to rape the source material beyond recognition.

It is being directed by the guy who did Daredevil, which I'm 50/50 on. There where some good things in DD, and some of the visualization of actual 'famous' DD panels was nice to see. But Affleck hissing "Justice" from the rafters is a cringer, and I don't think he really sold Elektra. And Kingpin.....I just don't know.......(ripping off the Batman movie wasn't the greatest thing, either-with Kingpin in his henchmen days killing DDs father. Come on.)

I need a map to get back on topic....