Another Bond connection for Mr. Jones.
Good villain.
Probably the bad guy?
1 Like
More likely, yes.
Alfred Molina talks being back as Otto Octavius
3 Likes
Raimi‘s part 2 = still the best Spiderman movie.
3 Likes
I suppose I’m one of the few that prefers the 2002 Spiderman, albeit not by much. They are basically 1 and 1A for the best Spidey movies. Though both Homecoming and Far From Home are excellent as is Into the Spider-Verse.
1 Like
I hugely enjoyed INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE. My main criticism of the films used to be that they didn’t make the most of the silver age story arcs, especially wasted that one moment that ended the silver age on the first SPIDER-MAN. Everything afterwards, even SPIDER-MAN II, felt slightly off for me. But INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE felt at once fresh and nostalgic, opened the door to different interpretations and revived my interest somewhat.
Raimi’s first two takes seem closest to the Spider-Man I grew up with. But there’s no denying that Holland is immensely popular with the fans of this age, and that his interpretation fits much better into the MCU and possible crossovers with new Marvel productions, a Spider-Man as member of the Avengers, seem a safe bet.
I have a few issues with the Raimi Spidermans (1-2, 3 is a totally different story). First, the organic web shooters are weird. Raimi said he went with that because he didn’t find it believable that a high school student could make web shooters (right, but a person gaining spider like abilities is totally believable). 2. Tobey Maguire makes a great Peter Parker, but a terrible Spiderman. He cries too much and he doesn’t do the quips very well. Other than those 2, the Spiderman 1 and 2 are superb films and still some of the best superhero movies ever. Oh, and they have the absolute best theme music. Spiderman 3, well, we don’t talk about Spiderman 3.
I have a completely different set of issues with The Amazing Spiderman movies.
- While it corrects the issue of the web shooters, it completely butchers the origin story (despite being a retelling of the same story from 10 years earlier).
- Andrew Garfield makes a great Spiderman, but a terrible Peter Parker. He is great at the confidence and quips, but is not convincing as a science nerd.
- The plot’s of both movies are very bland. It teases some untold story, that is never told through either film.
- The cast is great, but aren’t given great material to work with
- TAS 2 repeats all of the mistakes of SM3, one movie early.
1 Like
My thoughts to a t.
I’d add that it also refuses to commit to a plot so it can set up ones for other films.
SM3 at least you can see why it failed, Raimi’s love was for that Stan Lee 60’s era, but then he was forced to put the most 90’s plot that ever existed as the films centre point. It was NEVER going to work.
I’m a tad worried about Spiderman No Way Home repeating the issues off too many subplots and too many villains. However, the fact that the movie is in Marvel’s hands is more encouraging. They’ve actually done incredibly well with these massive team up movies (All 4 Avengers films and Captain America: Civil War). So I’m far more optimistic than before.
Agreed, TAS2 got caught up in that universe-building fad that ran roughshod over the industry post-Avengers 1 (Spectre was hurt by that too). Spiderman 3 reeked of studio meddling. Raimi had a very specific story he wanted to tell that involved New Goblin and Sandman. Venom was a forced inclusion by Sony and because of that didn’t really fit in and Raimi didn’t know how to handle the corrupted, black-suit Spiderman. How I wish I could wipe the memory of that horribly, cheesy dance sequence from my brain.
2 Likes
What I meant to say earlier about INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE: I would like to see more of Miles Morales, either as further mashups or his own solo adventures. And I certainly don’t qualify as the main target audience of that film.
It’s my favourite comic book movie of all time. For me it best demonstrates a superhero as a real, three dimensional person and the strain the heroics put on their life. It holds up very well but it’s also a nostalgic experience for me given the time period it was released.
2 Likes
Another day, another comic book movie return I swear we already knew.
2 Likes
To think, back then, if there had been the internet there would have been a huge outcry of “KEATON-NOT-BATMAN”.
Now, “FINALLY!KEATON BACK AS BATMAN”.
People are strange.
1 Like
There was a letter writing campaign against WB casting “Mr Mom”
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
1 Like
I remember. Oh, how innocent those times were…
Yes, I remember that too. Fans complaining about Keaton’s ‘weak chin’ (the part that would be visible in the costume) and his lack of height.
And it has to be said that compared to Superman
…Batman’s casting was going against the grain
1 Like
Both comic eras, by the way, were my favorite ones for Superman and Batman.
And while Superman was perfection with Christopher Reeve, I was surprised to see Keaton cast as Batman. But I enjoyed his take a lot.
And despite loving Nolan´s trilogy (after re-introducing myself to it last year) I must confess that the very good Bale is not the guy I imagine as the perfect Batman. Kilmer, Clooney, Affleck and - from the looks of the for my taste too young - Pattinson aren’t either.
Jon Hamm… yeah, more like the 70´s Batman I grew up with.
1 Like