The Tim Burton Batman films are both great.
The Tim Burton Batman films are both great.
"Excuse me Miss, do you like pineapple?"
Except for the fact that they're really not. Though Jack Nicholson does an excellent job of playing Jack Nicholson.Originally Posted by charliepanayi
Honestly, I find the original film completely unwatchable now except to make fun of it. Watching it makes the comic book geek in me want to die if only so I don't murder Tim Burton for having Batman kill several times over the course of the movie.
Oh my god I had a big post typed up and then I hit quote and lost the whole smurfing thing augh augh augh. Gist: Toby MacGuire was to nerdy to play Spider-Man, but nerdy enough to play Peter Parker. This new incarnation of Peter Parker is less nerdy and I think that's ok. Having Gwen Stacy in there helped make the origin stuff less boring, but I'd still prefer a reboot that just assumes you know who Spider-Man is and doesn't have to explain it to you in so much detail.
This movie wins for having the only Stan Lee cameo in the history of Stan Lee cameos that didn't make me want to reach into the screen and strangle him.
I thought it was pretty obvious that, on top of turning him into a giant lizard, the serum drove Connors insane. The giant rat was there to show Peter that the serum turns things into monsters. I think the Indian dude hit his head and died in the car, though I'm not sure and they really should have made it more obvious if that's the case. And the guy who killed Uncle Ben not getting caught gives Spider-Man another reason to keep fighting crime. Peter still had the police sketch pinned to his bulletin board at the end of the movie for a reason.
That Stan Lee cameo was amazing. Though I feel I must add that his cameo in the first Hulk movie wasn't as blatantly obvious/cheese stuffed as many of his other ones. Not nearly as entertaining as this one mind you.
I feel the same way, especially when I have The Avengers and Batman movies for geeking out this summer. If it was the only comic book movie coming out this summer, then maybe I would go see it.
4444444444 4 4 444 44 4
Eh, I kind of want to see it simply because there's nothing else out to see right now. That, and I never saw any of the other Spiderman films.
A reboot for Spiderman seems almost as unnecessary as The Incredible Hulk though.
I like Kung-Fu.
It was an alright flick.
It was quite good but then again I barely remember the other spiderman movies. Most of the things I think have already been said, though I think by not catching his uncle's killer it shows he has a stronger resolve to fight crime for the right reasons rather than as a personal vendetta. If he had caught him then went on the fight crime for the right reasons, just because he was done with what he was doing, like he did in the other movies, it doesnt show that he places duty above his personal need for revenge. Either that or theyre leaving it open for a sequel.
Some nitpicky moments:
(SPOILER)
The scene when the bully accidentally knocks over the girls paint can: Why was that girl painting on a basketball court in the first place? She was asking for it.
When Gwen pulls the alarm to get everyone out of the building: Seriously? an alarm where you have to input a 5 digit code then pull the alarm? Whoever thought of that needs to figure out the meaning of the word 'emergency'. Not only is it inefficient, if the touch screen was somehow smashed in an emergency, everyone in the building could die.
When the lizard attacked the highschool: They were all out in the hall, meaning they were in between classes, and the lizard was able to mix two beakers of chemicals sitting on the lab bench, which means someone forgot to clear up after the lab and just decided to leave two apparently dangerous chemicals lying around. I know even my most relaxed chemistry teachers in highschool wouldnt stand for that tit.
edit: just rewatched the first spiderman movie, never realised he was the guy from Pleasantville. I cant say which is better but the new one is funnier. The old one deffinitely does have a corny superhero movie feel to it but thats not really a bad thing depending on the mood youre in when you watch it.
Last edited by blackmage_nuke; 07-08-2012 at 05:43 PM.
Kefka's coming, look intimidating!
Have a nice day!!
I honestly think it wasn't that bad. I liked this Peter Parker versus the old one.
There were many flaws in it of course like the character development, but the film makers probably thought everyone should know most of Spidey's story. But at the same time, this is a whole new movie.
No time for "Dilly-Dallying" or "Shilly-Shallying."
Props go to the one and only, Proxy, for the signature.
I have little doubt that I'll like this version of Spidey better than the original, but the problem is that the original was still pretty good and it is still fresh in my mind. If there was no Spider-Man movie then I would be at the midnight release of this movie. It's just that I've seen Spidey's origin story done too many times to want to sit through another retelling of it.
I'm interested enough to want to see it but not for 13 dollars. Maybe if it comes to the cheaper theater for $5.
Proud to be the Unofficial Secret Illegal Enforcer of Eyes on Final Fantasy!
When I grow up, I want to go toBovineTrump University! - Ralph Wiggum
I have to disagree with you on this because apparently in six more films the Hulk will be portrayed by Mark smurfing Ruffalo, and that is something I can get behind because he was an amazing Bruce Banner.
But this is a thread about Spider-man, so.
I have to disagree with you on this because apparently in six more films the Hulk will be portrayed by Mark smurfing Ruffalo, and that is something I can get behind because he was an amazing Bruce Banner.
But this is a thread about Spider-man, so.
I prefer my Hulk of the Norton variety. I will not watch Avengers ever...and that's part of the reason.
Saw it, liked it, but I also understand why people have the problems that they do with it.
However... *takes nervous breath*
I really never got into the Spiderman movies of last decade. Sure, I enjoyed the first two and thought the third one was trash like most people, but at the same time I didn't go crazy over them. Plus, aspects of the other movies really, really didn't age well. Some of the acting was cheesier than I remembered, and while I understand the other movies were made awhile ago, some CGI looks silly too.
I like how they shuffled up the origin story in this one, and if they continue the series I will probably end up seeing it.
I also like Andrew Garfield better as Peter Parker/Spider man. Again, this is because of my wishy washy attitude toward the other films. Eh, maybe Spider Man 3 left a really mad taste in my mouth too.
Then you are going to miss some awesome albeit over the top trout.
I'm pretty much going to defer to Vivi22 and Sephex here. The Amaziong Spider Man is just a way better film than the originals, partly because it's less campy, mostly because Garfield is head over heels a better Peter Parker/Spider Man than Toby was, and Emma Stone did a great job as Gwen Stacy. The fight scenes are just better, the web slinging is better, the dialogue is better, and Spider Man actually has fun being Spider Man unlike MacGuire's Spidey who has two emotions: Crying and awkward geekiness.
The originals have not aged well and the acting by Dunst and MacGuire is often sappy and over the top. It's almost cartoonish watching it now. The only thing Spider Man 1 has over Amazing Spider Man is a better villain. The Lizard was never my fave Spidey villain but the movie does try to build up Norman Osborne in the background, so I am really looking forward to the next film.
True beauty exists in things that last only for a moment.
Current Mood: And it's been a long December and there's reason to believe. Maybe this year will be better than the last. I can't remember all the times I tried to tell myself. To hold on to these moments as they pass...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
