What exactly do you expect Stan Lee to say? He surely isn't going to insult the actor at the center of one of Marvel's biggest franchises (in terms of revenue) after the fact.
What exactly do you expect Stan Lee to say? He surely isn't going to insult the actor at the center of one of Marvel's biggest franchises (in terms of revenue) after the fact.
Last edited by Splash!; Thu, 07-19-2012 at 06:58 PM.
Actually yes. I was wondering what the hell you meant by your earlier post. As if Stan Lee's opinion somehow invalidated UC's. Not sure how to properly explain my reasoning without some long run-on post. I will just say that the fact that Stan Lee is the creator of Spiderman does not mean that he knows best who should play the character in a movie. That belongs to the director who really should be the one to have final say on who he feels would best embody the character he is trying to portray.Originally Posted by Carnage
Secondly, Stan Lee seems to have no casting ability whatsoever. This is the same guy who said Ben Affleck was a great Daredevil and David Hassellhoff was a good Nick Fury.
Splash has another valid point.
Dreaming impossible dreams.
Sapphire is awesome!
What he said.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
Like UChess said Garfield's Spidey was awkward and shy in school and even around Gwen throughout the entire film. But despite being awkward and nerdy he was still standing up for the kid getting beat up... as much as you could tell it was against his nature he did it anyway. Thats the type of character I appreciate, ones that are multi-dimensional and have different angles to them. And as the movie progressed so did he. You can especially see that when he was defending spiderman to the Captain. Clearly that scene was there to show that this kid who would have never said a word of disagreement to someone like that especially his girl's father, was now suddenly not as much fearless as he was brave in the face of fear if it meant doing what he believed in. THAT is what made me love this film and appreciate the subtle acting of Garfield.
So idk where you guys make him out to be this "hipster spiderman" just because he has a skateboard?? Are you kidding? Yeah I guess I can relate cause I was awkward in school and liked to skate. And despite him being shy and all he was still a cool guy underneath But I guess you just related more to the one dimensional Tobey?? He was a dork at first and then suddenly he's spidey and he's the most confident guy the second the glasses came off. Another small thing I really liked the glasses not being thrown out.
Oh an one last thing... Garfield was already a risk taker since he skated, so it wasn't like he was a total stranger to taking risks like jumping over gaps and such. So the transition to taking a risk and using the webs wasn't such a drastic one like Mcguire's seemed to me.
And remember this is coming from someone who LOVED the first 2 movies. The 2nd one obviously a little more than the 1st. Maybe I'm just a bit disenchanted by the supposed big ending of the trilogy and haven't let go my hate for souring two great films by ending it on sucha shitty note. It seemed like they weren't even sure if they were going to end it. I thought the venom spidey was cool when he fought sandman and all... but besides that they completely fuckd that movie. It shoulda ended with a battle between spiderman and sandman after he overcame venom. And then Eddie Brock should've been introduced and foreshadowed the next, and shoulda been, 4th and final film. But I digress.
I think you guys who are hating this clearly great, not perfect, but great film are looking at it with hate blinders on because like someone said already; they think its too soon for a reboot or they liked the original trilogy so this feels like blasphemy. Which I understand but hopefully you'll give this film another chance and take some of the things I said about it into consideration next time you see it.
All of the Marvel movies make a mess of the material and lore of their heroes. Wolverine, the X-men, Thor, Spider-man, etc all had their stories changed significantly for the movies. And Peter Parker is a genius with access. If anyone could come up with the materials and design for an advanced looking costume, it'd be him.
I wasn't too happy at the natural web goo in the first movie instead of the mechanical ones, but if you're going to question his ability to fabricate a costume, then you have to question the ability of a teenager to make synthetic web goo and the devices that can reliably dispense that goo. Also, it's not a stretch that he produce the webbing naturally, considering his spider-abilities.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
It depends on which Peter Parker you are a fan of I guess. As I pointed out earlier, the modern geek Parker is not the same nerd Parker that Stan Lee created and that Maguire portrayed. You guys are obviously fans of a newer, cooler Parker, such as KNJ mentioned, one that will stick up for a kid getting picked on. But Peter Parker from the original Spider-man comics was the kid getting picked on.Actually yes. I was wondering what the hell you meant by your earlier post. As if Stan Lee's opinion somehow invalidated UC's. Not sure how to properly explain my reasoning without some long run-on post. I will just say that the fact that Stan Lee is the creator of Spiderman does not mean that he knows best who should play the character in a movie. That belongs to the director who really should be the one to have final say on who he feels would best embody the character he is trying to portray.
Secondly, Stan Lee seems to have no casting ability whatsoever. This is the same guy who said Ben Affleck was a great Daredevil and David Hassellhoff was a good Nick Fury
Splash has another valid point.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Flash fuckd with him too at the start of the film. And then fuckd him into the ground after he stood up for the kid.
ANd you got that backwards. Garfield's the nerd Parker and Maguire is the dork or geek Parker.
Science whizzes are nerds and dorks, not geeks. Garfield's is more the hipster doofus.
But whatever, people will like the Peter Parker they identify with. Just like they'll be happy with a black Nick Fury.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Nick_FuryWhen the character resurfaced in 2002 in The Ultimates, he had been redesigned to look like actor Samuel L. Jackson. Jackson did not originally give his consent for Marvel Comics to use his likeness in their redesign of the Fury character for The Ultimates,[4] and first appeared with this revised look in The Ultimates #1, as drawn by Bryan Hitch. The similarity is even noted within the comic itself, in a scene in which the Ultimates discuss who they think should play each of them in a hypothetical movie about the team. Fury's answer for himself is "Mr. Samuel L. Jackson, of course, no discussion." It was only after seeing the redesigned Nick Fury in the first issue of The Ultimates that Samuel L. Jackson learned of the use of his likeness and contacted Marvel in order to secure the role of Nick Fury in any future Marvel movies.
So it seems like this version appeared in comics 6 years before his first appearance in a movie (Iron Man came out 2008), even though his design was based on the actor that would eventually play him. That's kind of a mind-fuck.
All true. Marvel changed him to a black character in the Ultimate universe. I understand the need to diversify their characters, but I think it could be better done with new characters instead of changing existing ones. Nick Fury is a somewhat minor character in the big scheme of things, but it irks me for some reason that they changed his race.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
Hipster doofus, really?
It's ironic that you would make this point because the BIGGEST problem I had with Maguire's Parker is that in no way did I get the feeling that he was an intelligent individual. Sure, there was a lot of awkwardness and social ineptitude but that was about it. I definitely did not sense a brilliant young mind somewhere in there, even though the script tried to pass him off as one.
In my experience, truly intelligent people (even if they are socially inept) have pretty rich personalities in their own ways. I actually got that from Garfield's character, in spite of his 'hipster' persona. I just got nerd and dork from Maguire.
So for me, it was more like nerdy doofus vs witty hipster. I prefer the latter.
Totally agree that the original trilogy forgot to make Parker actually smart. Spiderman2 fixed that to an extent, because he was actually able to ask intelligent things to Doc Oc. So...then they ruined it in the third again.
The biggest problem with that was the Maguire's Parker produced his own webbing inside his body, while Garfield not only reverse engineered the OsCorp BioCable, he built the webshooters. I do wish they had showed that, at least in the training montage.
You could immediately tell that Garfield's Parker was an intelligent nerd through a few of the subtle hints they tossed in there. The remote activated, servo-driven door lock being the most obvious.
All those franchises you listed, cept tobeyman, actually adapted the lore in a very sensible way; spiderman trilogy was a complete and utter mess lore wise for more than the reasons I listed.
Making web goo and mechanical devices isn't a stretch because parker is supposedly a genius, he fixes things, he builds things; he isn't a tailor/fashion designer/cosplayer.
The costume they built for the movies is seriously something even professional cosplaying teams have a hard time trying to reproduce.
Amazing's costume however looks like something that was cut and pasted together, heck the shoes he wears are actual shoes, not some formfitting spacewear tobey conjured up out of nowhere.
And yes natural webbing is a fucking stretch because parker never had this ability up until a bit before civil war where he underwent some changes aside from natural webbing (stingers and such), which was in ~2005, the movie came out in 2002.
Oh and parker no longer has natural webbing in the comics either, they disappeared after civil war.
So yeah while they were good movies in their own right, they crapped allll over spiderman lore so they can go fuck themselves into oblivion now that amazing is here.
Seems you don`t know this already, so i`ll GLADLY let you know that Fury is now black in 616 as well.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
I stopped reading comics seriously circa 1990s. I've read a few since then, but with all the changes/crossovers/alternate universes it got too ridiculous.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
There`s been changes/crossovers/alternate universes LONG before 1990.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
HA! Damn right!!
Amazing wasn't the greatest film but it was a perfect origin story IMO. You feel like you actually know who Peter Parker was/is with the flashbacks to his parents. Showing where Peter gets his genius from was a little touch I appreciated. And the way they incorporated his father's research into not only being involved with Connors but also Osborn in such a hypehypehype way of setting the score for the upcoming sequel.
Oh and while we're on the topic of "Tobeyman" (thankyou ds) and his costume, it wasn't just his that seemed totally out of place. Was the Glider suit that became the Green Goblin suit originally designed that way?? It was meant for military use was it not? So then can someone explain to me why it looked the way it did..... completely ridiculous? Even putting aside the BRIGHT green coloring, that mask alone hardly seems like something they'd want to use to impress the military. And anyway even lets say Norman changed it to make it look that way after the fact, it still looked like something out of the Power Rangers movie.
Yes of course there were, but not to the degree since then. I think the stories/characters started getting dull/stale around that time so the companies started doing weirder crossovers/alternate lines. I think that's about when the 2099 series came out. A lot of fans moved to the independent publishers like Valiant/Defiant and Dark Horse around that time, rather than see their favorite characters changed or expanded in ways that were contrary to the heroes we knew and loved.
“For God will not permit that we shall know what is to come... those who by some sorcery or by some dream might come to pierce the veil that lies so darkly over all that is before them may serve by just that vision to cause that God should wrench the world from its heading and set it upon another course altogether and then where stands the sorcerer? Where the dreamer and his dream?”
I get the impression that you don`t like it anymore because it`s different, not because it`s "worse", a lot of changes are good, and helped the characters so much (Aquaman, Animal Man), seeing the character staying the same for over 50 years would be boring as fuck.
You cannot hope to build a better world without improving the individuals. To that end each of us must work for his own improvement, and at the same time share a general responsibility for all humanity, our particular duty being to aid those to whom we think we can be most useful. -Marie Curie
Change is great and a necessity but I also tire quickly of all the alternate realities and such. One or two wouldn't be so terrible but when every day theres another popping up it gets to be near impossible for anyone to follow a single story.
Right now I'm just jumping around and finding some gems like this Batman 'Black Mirror' book. Probably my favorite comic to date. It'd be nice to be able to follow a continual story but there's so many 'this guys back from the dead with no explanation', and 'in an alternate reality he fell from the sky and landed in our reality' it just really gets to be too much.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
