Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 107
  1. #16
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,566

    Default

    ...........
    Last edited by solletaire; 12-12-2014 at 09:46 PM.

  2. #17
    Mighty Member Da Boat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    French America
    Posts
    1,606

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by solletaire View Post
    Everyone is entitles to their opinion. I also disagree that James Mcavoy who is 35 can ever play a teenaged Peter Parker.
    1. Garfield is 31

    2. Mcavoy as I said, looks young forever

    3. Spider-Man doesn't have to stay a teen forever. It's been 5 movies already. In fact I'd rather that the one that shows up in Avengers to be an older Spidey.

  3. #18
    Astonishing Member PretenderNX01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    2,951

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    2) the goblin has a rich history in the spiderman mythos. Taking him away would be like taking dick Grayson away.
    I'd argue Burton and Nolan did just fine without Grayson.

    Marvel's issue is they keep wanting Spider-Man to be Spider-Boy. He can't be married in the comics because it ages him, they don't want Garfield because he's out of high school.
    Don't nobody tell them RDJ is closing in on 50.

  4. #19
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PretenderNX01 View Post
    I'd argue Burton and Nolan did just fine without Grayson.

    Marvel's issue is they keep wanting Spider-Man to be Spider-Boy. He can't be married in the comics because it ages him, they don't want Garfield because he's out of high school.
    Don't nobody tell them RDJ is closing in on 50.
    And I was afraid this would happen before Sony was revealed to be even worse. Marvel craves for a young spiderman. And people still by into this **** despite the fact that he's been a grown up for decades. Garfield still looks young and college students are still kinda kids too. So what's the deal?

  5. #20
    Amazing Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    39

    Default

    I think the casting in all the Spider-man films has been generally OK, and possibly stronger in the Mark Webb films. I'll definitely take Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone over Toby McGuire and Kirsten Dunst (although JK Simmons was probably about as perfect a J. Jonah Jameson as you can get). The problem is that all the films (both the Raimi and Webb versions) are all essentially the same movie! They need to get Spidey doing something else other than fighting a couple of super-powered bad guys around Manhattan while he's fretting about his girlfriend, Aunt May, J. Jonah Jameson, and the Osbornes. I guess they tried to add a different dimension in the Webb films with the storyline about Peter's parents being spies or whatever they were, but I think people are just getting a little bored with it all. At least I am. Spidey's "universe" is pretty small, and it can work well in one or maybe two movies, but as an ongoing franchise it's a challenge to keep it from being completely repetitive, which is what we've been getting.

    I think the way to go is to bring Spidey into the next Cap film as an established player in the Marvel Cinematic universe. No need to reboot the entire franchise so we get yet another movie with Spidey's origin and him fighting the Green Goblin. We've seen that story enough. Getting him involved with Cap and the Avengers can be the springboard to a better variety of stories for Spider-Man.

  6. #21
    Amazing Member Stay Puft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    68

    Default

    To be honest, there are some likable things about Garfield...he played a good "quippy" Spidey in the suit and in my mind has the lankiness I would expect to see in a younger Spider-Man, but as for Peter Parker, he's too intense for my liking, way too self-assured...and this coming from someone who is not holding Raimi's version high on a pedestal either. The web-swinging on ASMs were awesome, giving off the great rush of what it means to be a free-swingin' spider, but the story was just too much...with this ridiculous link between Peter's parents and OsCorp and his best friend...and how Peter got Spider-ized like it was his destiny. I liked the more haphazard approach...a regular, smart kid, clumsily getting bitten and then whammo, his whole life changes.

    That being said, i would love to see Spider-man get to play with The Avengers...just drop him in there without any sort of origin...we all know who he is...and then just build in his story as time or other film features would allow. The Avengers can just look at him and say "Oh, yeah...we heard of you. We just figured we'd leave you alone to catch bank-robbers."

    Sony stands to make a lot of money that way since they will have minimal production cost yet get to skim $$$ off of loaning their character in the storyline...that sounds like a good moneymaking ratio. They are having this Spider-Summit because they know Sinister Six is probably not tracking well at all...and Marvel Studio changed the game with an inclusive MCU.

    I am pretty sure the only reason Sony would consider this is that ASM 2 (while still had made money) pulled in less than all other films and that their attempt to boot up a superhero franchise on Spidey's wings to compete with Marvel/Disney AND DC's juggernaut lineup may be a bad move. But then again, it said the talks fell apart...so that deal may be off the table...unless fans twist their arm and show that this is what we want.
    Reading Miracleman, Amazing Spider-Man, Batman Eternal, Earth2, Gotham Academy.

  7. #22
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KabutoRyder View Post
    If Marvel wants to bring Spidey back with a clean slate and back burner the emo romancy stuff in new movies I am all for it. For all the good of the ASM movies, I love Garfield's quippy Spider-Man, so much was done wrong. I am all for shaking that baggage and starting again with an established spidey so we dont need yet another movie where Uncle Ben dies.
    But how would Marvel do it? Movie Spider-Man doesn't have anything to sell to the devil.

  8. #23
    Extraordinary Member Crimz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    8,019

    Default

    I liked Garfield's Spiderman, his Peter Parker could have been better. But his Spiderman was fun and not was wrong with the films, his chemistry with Emma Stone's Gwen was great. If Marvel gets Spidey back then I want Grant Gustin for Spiderman.

  9. #24

    Default

    Latino Review is about as reliable as a Disney villain.

    That being said, Andrew Garfield is pretty much perfect as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, and re-casting would be a huge misstep as well as a pretty big "eff you" to Garfield. The only way I'd be okay with a new actor playing Spider-Man is if they went with Miles Morales, even if he was re-written as the "main" Spider-Man of the MCU.

  10. #25
    Fantastic Member arosenbarger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    432

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by simbob4000 View Post
    But how would Marvel do it? Movie Spider-Man doesn't have anything to sell to the devil.
    You, internet contributor, win the internet for today. Here are your tokens!
    I love comics and make art. Check it out: https://www.facebook.com/pages/ARose...9658123?ref=hl

  11. #26
    BANNED Crimson Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    1) he kissed Gwen because he was overjoyed. I do things like that at times.

    2) the goblin has a rich history in the spiderman mythos. Taking him away would be like taking dick Grayson away.
    I would argue, with GG being the arch nemesis, that it's more like taking away the Joker, but yes, I agree.

    Like, feel it can work with Doc Ock, symbiotes, odd vampire, like Morbius, or Morlun, and the animal villains, all that.

    And, all sorts of different Peters. The confident, the underconfident, the angry, the mean, the brooding, the sad, the happy, the heroic, the villainous, all that.

    So, not sure either MacGuire or Garfield are wrong, just more aspects and interpretations of the character.

    Glad TASM2 was less emotionally overwrought, with more action, comedy and all that.

    Wish it was a bit less scattered, or crowded, but hopefully TASM3 can sort things like that out. Looking forward to Venom, and hope Sinister Six can work.

  12. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBenjaminParker View Post
    Latino Review is about as reliable as a Disney villain.

    That being said, Andrew Garfield is pretty much perfect as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, and re-casting would be a huge misstep as well as a pretty big "eff you" to Garfield. The only way I'd be okay with a new actor playing Spider-Man is if they went with Miles Morales, even if he was re-written as the "main" Spider-Man of the MCU.
    This is kinda what I was thinking. I actually enjoyed tasm films, but are no way near perfect. I would hate another recast and reboot as I like Andrew in the role, I think it would be the perfect time to do the death of peter parker and then bring miles morales in as marvels new spiderman. That way you get Sony to finish what they started and leave marvel something fresh and new. I have not read any of miles tales but have seen the good reviews and would be a younger spiderman which is what they would be after.

    I don't know if they could do this but if Sony and marvel could partner up for one last ASM film so Sony get one last pay off leaving them happy but with marvel taking the lead so that they are not left in a bad place. Peter could face off against the sinister six and die saving aunt may like in the comics doing what he couldn't for uncle Ben. Then marvel could start a series with miles who could be an ill patient who is under going treatment. Osborne senior is alive but still dying and has got Parkers body trying to duplicate Spider-Man's abilities on himself. They first try this on miles as an experiment before using it on Osborne. It works and they try to kill miles but he escapes. When he goes home nick fury is there to greet him and gives him the once you turn 18 talk your a shield agent.

    You can fill in the blanks from their but was thinking something along the lines of him wanting to understand his powers so he is filled in about Peter and visits aunt may who says he has been passed on a gift that should be used for good and that miles makes it his mission to get Parkers body back off Osborne. Osborne could be using the body to make him self even stronger than the original and a symbiotic suit that he would sell on the black market to armies and such. Miles attacks him and gets Parkers body back letting him rest in peace and miles making a promise that he will make the spiderman legacy proud. Also in the scuffle with Osbourne the symbiote suit could have escaped and found its way to Eddie Brock for a venom sequel. What you guys think? Sorry it was long.

  13. #28
    All-New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    8

    Default

    I really hope that Marvel and Sony can come to some agreements and turn the franchise around in a good way. These Sonyleaks give me some hope.
    I'm a big fan of Spidey & a large amount of Spider-Man comics is the core of my comics collection, yet I haven't even seen ASM2 yet. I just couldn't be bothered when it came out.

    I like the Raimi triology a lot (yes, even the third one), but I'm not devoted to those either, their biggest flaw IMO is that Spidey doesn't talk like comic book Spidey when he's in costume. They fixed that in the reboot - but, to me, in there it is not Spider-Man but Peter Parker who is completely unrecognizable to me from the character I know and love from the books.
    As others said, he's too confident, too sleek. But it's more than that, it's his whole attitude. I couldn't stand the way he treated Uncle Ben and Aunt May. At the end of the movie, he walks into his house all battered and bruised, May breaks down and all Peter does is give her a dry smile and wave it off with a shoulder-shake. Would comic-book Peter do that? No. He would try to make up an excuse like "Oh, stupid me, I managed to get run over by an elderly lady on a motorized wheelchair!" or something like that - be clumsy but charming, at least make an attempt to re-assure his dear aunt.

    I don't blame Andrew Garfield for it, although I don't think he has the right face for Peter Parker either - see (the rather bad) Avenging Spider-Man #5: the artist of that issue tried to make Peter look like Andrew Garfield and the result looks completely off.
    But no, the thin head and the massive hair aren't the main problem, it's the script. It's like they only read a couple of story outlines and went with an impression of an autistic nerd who can't properly connect with anyone around him; which led to a character completely lacking the goofy charm and caring nature of the guy from the comic books.

    IMO Andrew was good as Spider-Man, Tobey was pretty good as Peter; both actors could be good but the scripts haven't been able to get the right character out of them. I'd be perfectly fine with an abandonment of Sony's current course, including the casting.

  14. #29
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,168

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterBenjaminParker View Post
    Latino Review is about as reliable as a Disney villain.

    That being said, Andrew Garfield is pretty much perfect as Peter Parker/Spider-Man, and re-casting would be a huge misstep as well as a pretty big "eff you" to Garfield. The only way I'd be okay with a new actor playing Spider-Man is if they went with Miles Morales, even if he was re-written as the "main" Spider-Man of the MCU.
    But Latino Review breaks movie new that is true quite a bit. You may be thinking of Bleeding Cool when they try to break movie news.

  15. #30
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Crimson Knight View Post
    I would argue, with GG being the arch nemesis, that it's more like taking away the Joker, but yes, I agree.

    Like, feel it can work with Doc Ock, symbiotes, odd vampire, like Morbius, or Morlun, and the animal villains, all that.

    And, all sorts of different Peters. The confident, the underconfident, the angry, the mean, the brooding, the sad, the happy, the heroic, the villainous, all that.

    So, not sure either MacGuire or Garfield are wrong, just more aspects and interpretations of the character.

    Glad TASM2 was less emotionally overwrought, with more action, comedy and all that.

    Wish it was a bit less scattered, or crowded, but hopefully TASM3 can sort things like that out. Looking forward to Venom, and hope Sinister Six can work.
    oh yeah, hopefully sony can get their heads together and hopefully negociate a summit of adding TASM universe into the Marvel Live Action Universe(tv and film) and After TASM 3 or whatever spiderman movie comes in 2018 continue with a netflix series because the spiderman mythos works better on tv. it would be a wasted effort if they continue with the movies or reboot the movie with another movie. they wouldn't do things justice like flash and betty's chemistry, their struggles, the villain's development and lives, peter and mj's compelling chemistry, etc. spiderman is basically a soap opera and his rich history is more unique than him in the avengers.

Posting Permissions

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