Page 11 of 19 FirstFirst ... 789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 281
  1. #151
    Astonishing Member CrimsonEchidna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bor View Post
    Seems to me like your trying to fit in more USM then is really there. Harry`s character is much more original Lee/Romita/Conway then Bendis. Everything from his relationship with MJ, being roommates with Peter, to his becoming the new Goblin as revenge against Peter for the death of his father is much more ASM then USM. He even ends up dying trying to save/help Peter and redeems himself like that.
    I am not saying there is no USM there at all, but not as much as you seem to want to give it credit for.


    I think timing is kind of important here as well; by the time the first Raimi film began production, Ultimate Spider-Man had only just started getting printed. If anything, it was kind of the reverse where Bendis was influenced by the Raimi films in some areas like how Jameson got written.
    The artist formerly known as OrpheusTelos.

  2. #152
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    2,462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    Not really. Peter's can be a pretty cynical guy. Not as cynical as Wolverine or the Punisher but he isn't a person who sees the good in everybody. He'll express faith in somebody if they've given him reason to see them as potentially good (Black Cat and Prowler come to mind) but he doesn't see the good in everybody and he certainly doesn't see good in Carnage.
    That is true. In addition to Carnage,.Pete does not see good nor does he have any respect for Eddie Brock,.Michael Morbius
    or Victor Von Doom.
    Last edited by NC_Yankee; 02-26-2019 at 02:16 PM.

  3. #153
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Someplace thats not here
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonEchidna View Post
    I think timing is kind of important here as well; by the time the first Raimi film began production, Ultimate Spider-Man had only just started getting printed. If anything, it was kind of the reverse where Bendis was influenced by the Raimi films in some areas like how Jameson got written.
    In addition they also did the Lee thing of getting him to college rather quickly compared to something like USM where its the main setting. By the second act of Raimi`s first film high school is long gone.

  4. #154
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bor View Post
    I am not saying there is no USM there at all, but not as much as you seem to want to give it credit for.
    Most of Raimi's films are from the Lee/Ditko/Romita era but it did borrow specific bits from USM for the first film.

    The other thing it borrowed from USM is the relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben and the entire sequence leading to his death. Peter and Uncle Ben having a fight and parting on bad words in their last meeting together is from USM. It's not there in AF#15. In the movie that final scene between Cliff Robertson and Peter where Uncle Ben says "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" was done in USM because that was originally the closing captions (and in ASM never directly attributed to Uncle Ben until 1987) and there needed some dramatic moment where this shows up. As is the idea that Peter's wrestling costume be some threadbare thing when Peter already created the Spider-Man costume and webshooters in that hallway panel where he lets the burglar go.

    The whole point of AF#15 is to take all excuses from Peter's actions. He was young and had no control of his powers. Nope. He did. He wasn't Spider-Man yet. Nope he already created his costume and web-shooters. The movie invents another motive with the fight promoter stiffing him money making it an act of revenge, when that didn't happen in the AF#15. The point in the original comic was that Spider-Man letting the burglar go was entirely selfish, indifferent, and uncaring. You are told in detail that Spider-Man was more than capable of bringing him down (one thwip of his shooters was all he needed to do) and he didn't. In the movie, the reasons and motivations are overly dramatized to give a sense of the emotional impact of Uncle Ben's passing, which was also the reasoning in USM. Bendis overly featured Uncle Ben in the opening six issues to drive home the impact of his passing, even giving him some of Aunt May's stuff, i.e. trying to get Peter to ask MJ out.

    Seems to me like your trying to fit in more USM then is really there. Harry`s character is much more original Lee/Romita/Conway then Bendis. Everything from his relationship with MJ, being roommates with Peter, to his becoming the new Goblin as revenge against Peter for the death of his father is much more ASM then USM. He even ends up dying trying to save/help Peter and redeems himself like that.
    Harry Osborn's character is absolutely nothing like the one in the classic period. Harry Osborn and Peter met in college. Peter got in on ESU on scholarship while Harry was the fop on Daddy's money. Harry was the rebound that MJ dated when Peter and Gwen became a thing, and even then MJ dumped him when he doped and became needy. The movie makes Harry Osborn this cool guy who kind of uses/exploits Peter and is jealous of him but there doesn't seem to be any reason for that. Because Peter isn't popular with girls in the movie when he was, when he and Harry met in 616. In USM, in the first issues, Harry is friends with Peter, but mostly Peter does his homework. He doesn't do a good job protecting him from Flash and others. So that's closer to the character that Franco played.

    The trick with Peter and Harry Osborn is that despite Harry being the rich kid he's more of a loser and becomes more and more of a loser than Peter Parker. Weisman's Spectacular Spider-Man even if it makes Harry a high schooler did that well. But the trilogy never gives a sense of that dynamic.

    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonEchidna View Post
    I think timing is kind of important here as well; by the time the first Raimi film began production, Ultimate Spider-Man had only just started getting printed. If anything, it was kind of the reverse where Bendis was influenced by the Raimi films in some areas like how Jameson got written.
    Spider-Man 1 was released in 2002. USM#1 came out in 2000. So there's a two year gap an Bendis came first. By the time Raimi's film hit the theatres, Bendis and Bagley were already some 15-16 issues in, which including the first appearances of Jameson and others. Bear in mind that by the time Issue #1 hit the stands, many other issues would have already been written and quite ahead in production. Originally USM was to be a limited series only and it got expanded due to high sales into a regular ongoing.

    And Bendis' take on Jonah is absolutely nothing like JK Simmons. Bendis' Jonah is overly serious, and not as jokey, and generally not much of a presence until after Ultimatum and the second volume.

    JK Simmons' Jonah is basically the classic Lee-Ditko one. IT's the most perfect casting of a comic character since Shelley Duvall was cast as Olive Oyl in Popeye.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 02-26-2019 at 02:30 PM.

  5. #155
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    34,005

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The whole point of AF#15 is to take all excuses from Peter's actions. He was young and had no control of his powers. Nope. He did. He wasn't Spider-Man yet. Nope he already created his costume and web-shooters. The movie invents another motive with the fight promoter stiffing him money making it an act of revenge, when that didn't happen in the AF#15. The point in the original comic was that Spider-Man letting the burglar go was entirely selfish, indifferent, and uncaring.
    I’d say letting a crook get away out of petty revenge is pretty damn selfish.


    Harry Osborn's character is absolutely nothing like the one in the classic period. Harry Osborn and Peter met in college. Peter got in on ESU on scholarship while Harry was the fop on Daddy's money. Harry was the rebound that MJ dated when Peter and Gwen became a thing, and even then MJ dumped him when he doped and became needy. The movie makes Harry Osborn this cool guy who kind of uses/exploits Peter and is jealous of him but there doesn't seem to be any reason for that.
    You mean besides Peter having parental figures that spend time with him, Norman being openly admiring Peter and dismissing Harry and MJ showing obvious attraction to Peter?

    The trick with Peter and Harry Osborn is that despite Harry being the rich kid he's more of a loser and becomes more and more of a loser than Peter Parker. Weisman's Spectacular Spider-Man even if it makes Harry a high schooler did that well. But the trilogy never gives a sense of that dynamic.
    By the second movie, Harry’s friendship with Peter is down the toilet, he’s become an alcoholic and his company and family name are mud. By the third film he becomes a super villain and has his face gets scarred in a fight with Peter.
    Even the first movie doesn’t portray Harry as popular. He’s mocked by Flash and the jocks and has no friends outside of Peter and MJ.

  6. #156
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Z View Post
    I’d say letting a crook get away out of petty revenge is pretty damn selfish.
    The point is it makes Peter's actions more understandable. Because Tobey Maguire's Peter was established already as a nice boy. He's kind and compassionate to MJ for her troubled home, and so on. Peter having a friend in Harry is itself a reduction and alteration. Because didn't have any friends at that time. In fact until he started dating Betty (Peter went from friendless to having a girlfriend...because he's a stud), he didn't have any companions. So Peter callously telling the fight promoter up yours when he let the burglar go in AF#15 because he was a straight-up d--k wouldn't fit with the more softer character you have in the trilogy.

    So Peter letting the Burglar go in response to the fight promoter stiffing him over in the context is understandable. And it's also tragic. Because I think a lot of people in that situation you might say, sure I might have done that to someone if they stiffed me too. So you as an audience feel complicit in his actions, whereas in AF#15, it was pretty obvious that Peter letting that burglar go was just pure selfishness because as he said earlier, "I only care for my Aunt and Uncle who are nice to me, the rest can go hang for all I care".

    You mean besides Peter having parental figures that spend time with him, Norman being openly admiring Peter and dismissing Harry and MJ showing obvious attraction to Peter?
    Norman admiring Peter and dimissing Harry wasn't there in the Lee-Romita era, nor in USM. Peter and Norman hardly spent time in the Lee-Romita, and even then Norman always saw Peter as "Harry's friend and room-mate" and no one else. Their major significant interaction was the Drug Trilogy where Peter goes to Norman on Harry's advice to see if he could work at Oscorp and meets him at his office (with that Jackson Pollock-esque painting in that lovely background Romita put there). And then Norman has his head-aches and Peter gets uncomfortable and so on.

    It was Roger Stern's Revenge of the Green Goblin that introduced the idea that Norman liked and admired Peter and saw in him as the son he always wanted. That came out in 2000 and as per Stern it was commissioned from him because they wanted to put a standalone Goblin story as a lead-up to the fact that Goblin was going to be in the movie. Originally the idea was to put Electro and Sandman, and then Dr. Octopus as the villains for the movie. Later they decided to make Goblin the villain. In the movie, Norman Osborn keeps saying that he wants Spider-Man to "join him". What exactly Goblin means by that isn't clear in the movie. Join him and do what? Bomb the **** out of NY. Roger Stern's Revenge of the GG shows that what Goblin wants is to make Peter into a Goblin and he does that in the film by gaslighting and torturing him.

  7. #157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Walton View Post
    I just don't see any USM influence in the Raimi films. In style and execution, they are almost wholly cut from the Lee/Romita Sr. cloth, with plot elements from Gerry Conway as well.
    Eddie Brock jr is an Ultimate thing. I forgot the name of Eddie's father in mainstream Marvel.
    TRUTH, JUSTICE, HOPE
    That is, the heritage of the Kryptonian Warrior: Kal-El, son of Jor-El
    You like Gameboy and NDS? - My channel
    Looks like I'll have to move past gameplay footage

  8. #158
    Astonishing Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Spider-Man 1 was released in 2002. USM#1 came out in 2000. So there's a two year gap an Bendis came first. By the time Raimi's film hit the theatres, Bendis and Bagley were already some 15-16 issues in, which including the first appearances of Jameson and others. Bear in mind that by the time Issue #1 hit the stands, many other issues would have already been written and quite ahead in production. Originally USM was to be a limited series only and it got expanded due to high sales into a regular ongoing.
    USM started around October 2000, and filming on the first Raimi film started in January 2001, with the script, casting, and production starting much before that, so the film couldn't have taken any significant influences from Ultimate. Just from the overall style, and the, for lack of a better term, cheesiness, of it all, Raimi is clearly channeling Lee/Ditko/Romita thru and thru.

    Honestly, its much more reasonable to think that USM itself took influence from what the Raimi film was going to do and incorporated some of those character dynamics into the comic.

  9. #159
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inversed View Post
    Honestly, its much more reasonable to think that USM itself took influence from what the Raimi film was going to do and incorporated some of those character dynamics into the comic.
    That's possible. The origin in Raimi's Spider-Man 1 especially Peter and Uncle Ben having parting regrets has only one precedent and that was Bendis' USM #1. Three months is long enough to rewrite a screenplay draft and so on. The other thing is that USM was commissioned by Bill Jemas, publisher and VP, and Jemas has co-plotting credit, so it had high level executive input.

    So there's a strong synergy there between both projects. USM had negligible influence on the sequels. Had a little more influence on TASM-1 and TASM-2. And of course it informs Spider-Man: Homecoming, borrowing bits from the original run and Miles Morales, what with "Ganke" Ned Leeds. It's definitely the most influential bit of Spider-Man comics in the 21st Century.

    Just from the overall style, and the, for lack of a better term, cheesiness, of it all, Raimi is clearly channeling Lee/Ditko/Romita thru and thru.
    I never thought Raimi's films were especially cheesy compared to other superhero movies or the comics of its era or any other. And even USM has a lot of cheesiness.

    When I think cheesy I think Schumacher Batman movies. And Raimi's first two movies aren't close to that. Spider-Man 3 in some moments is unfortunately close to that. In fact they are quite serious. Like Peter Parker isn't a quipster in the movie. Mary Jane Watson one of the most cheerful and charismatic characters is fairly melancholy and depressive throughout the two movies. Jameson is a ball of fun but he's underused. Especially after the first film.

  10. #160
    Astonishing Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That's possible. The origin in Raimi's Spider-Man 1 especially Peter and Uncle Ben having parting regrets has only one precedent and that was Bendis' USM #1. Three months is long enough to rewrite a screenplay draft and so on. The other thing is that USM was commissioned by Bill Jemas, publisher and VP, and Jemas has co-plotting credit, so it had high level executive input.

    So there's a strong synergy there between both projects. USM had negligible influence on the sequels. Had a little more influence on TASM-1 and TASM-2. And of course it informs Spider-Man: Homecoming, borrowing bits from the original run and Miles Morales, what with "Ganke" Ned Leeds. It's definitely the most influential bit of Spider-Man comics in the 21st Century.
    Jemas being a co-plotter is also what makes me think that Ultimate directly took influence from the Raimi script, as he presumably would get to see it and could grab whatever elements worked for their book, and thus people would have something similar to read by the time the film comes out.

    Guardians Of The Galaxy, Black Panther, and Captain Marvel were other recent big examples that followed this approach.

    I never thought Raimi's films were especially cheesy compared to other superhero movies or the comics of its era or any other. And even USM has a lot of cheesiness.

    When I think cheesy I think Schumacher Batman movies. And Raimi's first two movies aren't close to that. Spider-Man 3 in some moments is unfortunately close to that. In fact they are quite serious. Like Peter Parker isn't a quipster in the movie. Mary Jane Watson one of the most cheerful and charismatic characters is fairly melancholy and depressive throughout the two movies. Jameson is a ball of fun but he's underused. Especially after the first film.
    You also got Dafoe doing his thing and hamming it up wonderfully. Franco gets his share of hamminess in 3. Maguire sells the goofiness and naivety of classic Peter Parker, which does lead to some unintentional laughs at points, there's a reason his face has been memed so much. And cheesiness isn't bad at all, the original 60s comics are VERY cheesy. But it works in the film because it takes itself seriously whenever it needs to, and the rest is so enjoyable.

  11. #161
    Better than YOU! Alan2099's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    7,421

    Default

    Didn't Ultimate X-men originally start as a way to expand or continue the movies? I seem to recall reading something like that back in the day when it first started.

  12. #162
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    9,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inversed View Post
    Jemas being a co-plotter is also what makes me think that Ultimate directly took influence from the Raimi script, as he presumably would get to see it and could grab whatever elements worked for their book, and thus people would have something similar to read by the time the film comes out.
    In this case it's three months before film entered production and nearly 2 years before release. By the time the movie came out in May 2002, USM was 20 issues in.

    You also got Dafoe doing his thing and hamming it up wonderfully.
    Only Goblin. Norman is a jaded sad-sack and meek character as played by him in the first movie. The movie version of Norman is very much a Romita take. This decent guy who got made evil by formula. Ditko's Norman was a scumbag from the get-go and never had anything good to him.

    For me, Spider-Man 1 was my introduction to Dafoe, one of the greatest actors in America. And I rediscovered a lot of his obscure and cult stuff in the wake of that.

    He was quite scary and creepy especially when he threatens Aunt May. I am one of the very few who likes the Green Goblin outfit in the film and prefer it to the comics. No man-purse, and he's an actually Green Goblin as opposed to the Purple-and-Green one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan2099 View Post
    Didn't Ultimate X-men originally start as a way to expand or continue the movies? I seem to recall reading something like that back in the day when it first started.
    Ultimate X-Men started in February 2001, inspired by the success of USM. Ultimates started in March 2002, Ultimate Fantastic Four in February 2004.

    Morrison's New X-Men started in May 2001, and that also took inspiration from the Fox movies. Hence Morrison and Quitely's X-Men all wearing black leather, and you had the room-sized cerebro from the movie coming into the comics.

    X:Men Evolution started in 2000, so that's earlier and ultimately that cartoon introduced X-23.

    The biggest impact the movie had was the Origin miniseries in November 2001, which showed Wolverine's origin. Paul Jenkins wrote that story with a plotting credit by Quesada and Jemas. And Jenkins said the impetus was a commision by Fox. They wanted to deal with Wolverine's origins and the mandate was, either Marvel does it first or the movies will give their own origin.
    Last edited by Revolutionary_Jack; 02-26-2019 at 07:06 PM. Reason: change

  13. #163
    Moderator Frontier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    115,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    That actually is my point. USM had weak rogues.

    Yet at the same time, USM is the most popular and influential and widely liked Spider-man comics of the 21st Century and the one that brought Oscar gold to Marvel.

    If those comics did so well despite having a weak rogues gallery that does argue that Spider-Man's strength lies in Peter Parker and his supporting cast rather than the rogues.
    I think the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon did a better job of updating and depicting Spider-Man's Rogues Gallery then USM did.

    And I say this as someone who likes the USM version of the Rogues.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan2099 View Post
    Didn't Ultimate X-men originally start as a way to expand or continue the movies? I seem to recall reading something like that back in the day when it first started.
    I think Millar's approach to it was definitely that each volume or storyline would constitute how he'd approach a series of X-Men movies. Ditto with Ultimates.

    Coincidentally the second X-Men movie was based around Weapon-X, just like the second volume of Millar's Ultimate X-Men.

  14. #164
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Someplace thats not here
    Posts
    1,667

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Most of Raimi's films are from the Lee/Ditko/Romita era but it did borrow specific bits from USM for the first film.

    The other thing it borrowed from USM is the relationship between Peter and Uncle Ben and the entire sequence leading to his death. Peter and Uncle Ben having a fight and parting on bad words in their last meeting together is from USM. It's not there in AF#15. In the movie that final scene between Cliff Robertson and Peter where Uncle Ben says "With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility" was done in USM because that was originally the closing captions (and in ASM never directly attributed to Uncle Ben until 1987) and there needed some dramatic moment where this shows up. As is the idea that Peter's wrestling costume be some threadbare thing when Peter already created the Spider-Man costume and webshooters in that hallway panel where he lets the burglar go.
    Parting on bad ways is not something USM invented, that has been in several different other versions so again you are looking to fit USM in to the movies because you want it to fit in,

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The whole point of AF#15 is to take all excuses from Peter's actions. He was young and had no control of his powers. Nope. He did. He wasn't Spider-Man yet. Nope he already created his costume and web-shooters. The movie invents another motive with the fight promoter stiffing him money making it an act of revenge, when that didn't happen in the AF#15. The point in the original comic was that Spider-Man letting the burglar go was entirely selfish, indifferent, and uncaring. You are told in detail that Spider-Man was more than capable of bringing him down (one thwip of his shooters was all he needed to do) and he didn't. In the movie, the reasons and motivations are overly dramatized to give a sense of the emotional impact of Uncle Ben's passing, which was also the reasoning in USM. Bendis overly featured Uncle Ben in the opening six issues to drive home the impact of his passing, even giving him some of Aunt May's stuff, i.e. trying to get Peter to ask MJ out.
    Again not an invention of USM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    Harry Osborn's character is absolutely nothing like the one in the classic period. Harry Osborn and Peter met in college. Peter got in on ESU on scholarship while Harry was the fop on Daddy's money. Harry was the rebound that MJ dated when Peter and Gwen became a thing, and even then MJ dumped him when he doped and became needy. The movie makes Harry Osborn this cool guy who kind of uses/exploits Peter and is jealous of him but there doesn't seem to be any reason for that. Because Peter isn't popular with girls in the movie when he was, when he and Harry met in 616. In USM, in the first issues, Harry is friends with Peter, but mostly Peter does his homework. He doesn't do a good job protecting him from Flash and others. So that's closer to the character that Franco played.
    Oh please it is just nonsense to say Harry`s character is nothing like classic Harry. Again You are fitting USM version into it more for some reason then is there at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    The trick with Peter and Harry Osborn is that despite Harry being the rich kid he's more of a loser and becomes more and more of a loser than Peter Parker. Weisman's Spectacular Spider-Man even if it makes Harry a high schooler did that well. But the trilogy never gives a sense of that dynamic.


    Spider-Man 1 was released in 2002. USM#1 came out in 2000. So there's a two year gap an Bendis came first. By the time Raimi's film hit the theatres, Bendis and Bagley were already some 15-16 issues in, which including the first appearances of Jameson and others. Bear in mind that by the time Issue #1 hit the stands, many other issues would have already been written and quite ahead in production. Originally USM was to be a limited series only and it got expanded due to high sales into a regular ongoing.
    This ignores the how far ahead in time these things work not to mention that this was Sony making the movie with much less input from Marvel then nowadays.

  15. #165
    Astonishing Member Inversed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    3,425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolutionary_Jack View Post
    In this case it's three months before film entered production and nearly 2 years before release. By the time the movie came out in May 2002, USM was 20 issues in.
    It started filming 3 months after USM started, but the script had been written LONG before filming started. Not to mention all the pre-production work. They didn't write the script in 3 months. It's possible they could've taken some influence from some elements during post-production, but couldn't be anything significant, like character roles, story beats, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frontier View Post
    I think the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon did a better job of updating and depicting Spider-Man's Rogues Gallery then USM did.

    And I say this as someone who likes the USM version of the Rogues.
    Yeah, the Spectacular cartoon does a great job at fleshing the villains out in their own ways. Helps alot of them you get to see start out as just regular good guys, Brock, Max, Otto, etc.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •