Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 84
  1. #31
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    Peter stops for a while because he realizes that what he's doing is a mistake. His guilt blinded his responsibilities like it always does. Ben had a bigger role in the sequel but was cut.
    Mary Jane, Uncle Ben, all the stuff that actually matters to Spider-Man was cut so we could have Peter searching for "the truth" about Richard Parker.

    What terrible Spider-Man movies. What terrible Spider-Man priorities.

    Hopefully we'll get a decent sequel
    Let's hit that reboot button!

  2. #32
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,995

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    Mary Jane, Uncle Ben, all the stuff that actually matters to Spider-Man was cut so we could have Peter searching for "the truth" about Richard Parker.

    What terrible Spider-Man movies. What terrible Spider-Man priorities.
    Peter's desire for closeness and understanding with his biological parents is understandable. A lot of adopted children go through the same thing. They simply missed the boat on characterizing it, and by making Richard Parker so central to what makes Spider-Man, well, /Spider-Man/, they changed the nature of the character as well as devolved the important of Aunt May and Uncle Ben... which completely undermines what makes it so compelling.

    Turning Spider-Man into Peter Parker's birthright was a disastrous error that shows a complete misunderstanding of, to me, one of the most compelling points of Spidey's background, removes all chance and fortune from it, and is merely an attempt to cash in on an overarching metastory for a trilogy format. In the comics, you have twisted father figures like Norman Osborne to contrast with the seemingly wise Uncle Ben, or Doc Ock's overprotective mother, or Electro's absentee, abusive father, or Eddie Brock's cold, distant dad, and so on. It isn't about genetic heritage, or DNA. It's about how these people were shaped by their environment, by their /lives/, and even if it wasn't intentional, it's hard to miss how it's evolved over the years, in my view.

    Peter's biological parents shouldn't be involved in anything that makes him Spider-Man, beyond how their end passed him into Uncle Ben and Aunt May's hands, and frankly, they should never be touched on more than that. Ever. His parents are his aunt and uncle, and they raised him and shaped him into the man he should be. While the character can, as some people do, fail to grasp that due to a desire for connection with his biological parents, the narrative in the ASM movies failed on every count in that regard and in doing so removed an important mythological plank from Spider-Man's story.

    I maintain that one of the primary narrative themes that run through the cast of Spider-Man is nature versus nurture, and what the difference in values and upbringings and circumstances lead people to make their decisions. Almost every major character in Spidey's rogues gallery touches on this and all show us how /fortunate/ we are that the Spider landed on Peter and not someone else, someone who didn't have such figures as Uncle Ben and Aunt May in their life. It reaffirms the tragedy of Peter's earlier mistakes as well.

    The stories are about who you were yesterday, and who you'll be tomorrow -- which also goes back to why Spider-Man, at his finest, is also one of our most forgiving Super Heroes and why he always seems willing to try to give his even most ardent opponents (Hi, Ock!) a chance to change, even to his dying breath.
    Last edited by Tendrin; 01-07-2015 at 12:31 AM.

  3. #33
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    Peter's desire for closeness and understanding with his biological parents is understandable. A lot of adopted children go through the same thing. They simply missed the boat on characterizing it, and by making Richard Parker so central to what makes Spider-Man, well, /Spider-Man/, they changed the nature of the character as well as devolved the important of Aunt May and Uncle Ben... which completely undermines what makes it so compelling.

    Turning Spider-Man into Peter Parker's birthright was a disastrous error that shows a complete misunderstanding of, to me, one of the most compelling points of Spidey's background, removes all chance and fortune from it, and is merely an attempt to cash in on an overarching metastory for a trilogy format. In the comics, you have twisted father figures like Norman Osborne to contrast with the seemingly wise Uncle Ben, or Doc Ock's overprotective mother, or Electro's absentee, abusive father, or Eddie Brock's cold, distant dad, and so on. It isn't about genetic heritage, or DNA. It's about how these people were shaped by their environment, by their /lives/, and even if it wasn't intentional, it's hard to miss how it's evolved over the years, in my view.

    Peter's biological parents shouldn't be involved in anything that makes him Spider-Man, beyond how their end passed him into Uncle Ben and Aunt May's hands, and frankly, they should never be touched on more than that. Ever. His parents are his aunt and uncle, and they raised him and shaped him into the man he should be. While the character can, as some people do, fail to grasp that due to a desire for connection with his biological parents, the narrative in the ASM movies failed on every count in that regard and in doing so removed an important mythological plank from Spider-Man's story.

    I maintain that one of the primary narrative themes that run through the cast of Spider-Man is nature versus nurture, and what the difference in values and upbringings and circumstances lead people to make their decisions. Almost every major character in Spidey's rogues gallery touches on this and all show us how /fortunate/ we are that the Spider landed on Peter and not someone else, someone who didn't have such figures as Uncle Ben and Aunt May in their life. It reaffirms the tragedy of Peter's earlier mistakes.

    The stories are about who you were yesterday, and who you'll be tomorrow -- which also goes back to why Spider-Man, at his finest, is also one of our most forgiving Super Heroes.
    I dislike these movies putting so much on Richard Parker. That beyond a few platitudes, it's all about how our biological parents are our "real" parents. And people like Aunt May and Uncle Ben can never be that to Peter.

    It shows a lack of understanding of the Spider-Man narrative. Peter, abstractly, misses his biological parents. But the ones who really matter to him are Uncle Ben and Aunt May. Raimi got this right over a decade ago. And they screwed it up in "Amazing."

  4. #34
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,995

    Default

    It's a huge mistake and I really think it misses the boat on something that makes Spidey Spidey.

    My compulsion to edit my posts as I think of just ONE MORE THING appears. xD
    Last edited by Tendrin; 01-07-2015 at 12:43 AM.

  5. #35
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    Peter's desire for closeness and understanding with his biological parents is understandable. A lot of adopted children go through the same thing. They simply missed the boat on characterizing it, and by making Richard Parker so central to what makes Spider-Man, well, /Spider-Man/, they changed the nature of the character as well as devolved the important of Aunt May and Uncle Ben... which completely undermines what makes it so compelling.

    Turning Spider-Man into Peter Parker's birthright was a disastrous error that shows a complete misunderstanding of, to me, one of the most compelling points of Spidey's background, removes all chance and fortune from it, and is merely an attempt to cash in on an overarching metastory for a trilogy format. In the comics, you have twisted father figures like Norman Osborne to contrast with the seemingly wise Uncle Ben, or Doc Ock's overprotective mother, or Electro's absentee, abusive father, or Eddie Brock's cold, distant dad, and so on. It isn't about genetic heritage, or DNA. It's about how these people were shaped by their environment, by their /lives/, and even if it wasn't intentional, it's hard to miss how it's evolved over the years, in my view.

    Peter's biological parents shouldn't be involved in anything that makes him Spider-Man, beyond how their end passed him into Uncle Ben and Aunt May's hands, and frankly, they should never be touched on more than that. Ever. His parents are his aunt and uncle, and they raised him and shaped him into the man he should be. While the character can, as some people do, fail to grasp that due to a desire for connection with his biological parents, the narrative in the ASM movies failed on every count in that regard and in doing so removed an important mythological plank from Spider-Man's story.

    I maintain that one of the primary narrative themes that run through the cast of Spider-Man is nature versus nurture, and what the difference in values and upbringings and circumstances lead people to make their decisions. Almost every major character in Spidey's rogues gallery touches on this and all show us how /fortunate/ we are that the Spider landed on Peter and not someone else, someone who didn't have such figures as Uncle Ben and Aunt May in their life. It reaffirms the tragedy of Peter's earlier mistakes as well.

    The stories are about who you were yesterday, and who you'll be tomorrow -- which also goes back to why Spider-Man, at his finest, is also one of our most forgiving Super Heroes and why he always seems willing to try to give his even most ardent opponents (Hi, Ock!) a chance to change, even to his dying breath.
    Actually in TASM 1 he does care for his aunt and uncle. He moarned for his uncle and he was protective for his aunt may. In the deleted scenes he does care for them. In 2 they just shoved Richard down our throats. In the deleted scenes however he is shown to care fir his aunt and the editing in that movie just switched a few scenes around just to make Richard relevant.

  6. #36
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    Mary Jane, Uncle Ben, all the stuff that actually matters to Spider-Man was cut so we could have Peter searching for "the truth" about Richard Parker.
    MJ originally had like 3 or 4 short scenes. Uncle ben was relevant in the first movie and was cut out in the second. There was even a scene where he stopped andrew from beating up dehaan.

    What terrible Spider-Man movies. What terrible Spider-Man priorities.
    They're not even that bad nor offensive. That be maguire, dunst, Franco, venom and some stuff I can name later fir 3 and the raimi trilogy.


    Let's hit that reboot button!
    Let's not!

  7. #37
    Extraordinary Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    8,995

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    Actually in TASM 1 he does care for his aunt and uncle. He moarned for his uncle and he was protective for his aunt may. In the deleted scenes he does care for them. In 2 they just shoved Richard down our throats. In the deleted scenes however he is shown to care fir his aunt and the editing in that movie just switched a few scenes around just to make Richard relevant.
    Oh, I never said he didn't /care/ for them. It's just that their central importance in the mythos is downplayed.

  8. #38
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,227

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    MJ originally had like 3 or 4 short scenes. Uncle ben was relevant in the first movie and was cut out in the second. There was even a scene where he stopped andrew from beating up dehaan.
    Irrelevant. Those scenes aren't in the movie so we could have more about Peter's angst about Richard Parker.

    Horrible Spider-Man priorities are horrible.

    They're not even that bad nor offensive. That be maguire, dunst, Franco, venom and some stuff I can name later fir 3 and the raimi trilogy.
    "I have a father. His name was Ben Parker."

    This is good Spider-Man priorities. Not just offering false platitudes.

    Let's not!
    The Spider-Man films are costing more and more, and making less and less.

  9. #39
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    Oh, I never said he didn't /care/ for them. It's just that their central importance in the mythos is downplayed.
    Oh yeah totally. I mean its fine fir Richard to be relevant but don't make it more revelent than ben. It's not even that Richard is a bad character but he really caused alot of trouble. Ben was even cut in TASM 2.

  10. #40
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    448

    Default

    Let's not focus on status quo establishments please. Some change in spidey's basis could be refreshing.

  11. #41
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heasensy32 View Post
    Let's not focus on status quo establishments please. Some change in spidey's basis could be refreshing.
    like fixing things for a sequel and expanding spiderman in a tv series. movies haven't done him enough justice like maguire and the raimi films. the supporting characters are bland as hell and even mj and franco don't get strong portrayal and maguire was a terrible peter parker. he was always such a marshmellow. never acted like a person.

  12. #42
    Rookie Member BlueFlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Sony could salvage the Spider-Man franchise by finding a director who possesses a love and knowledge of Spidey and a vision for the character. They found that in Raimi, who captured Peter's earnestness, decency, and dorkiness. And what Raimi did so well is allow the characters to be interesting and well-rounded. Raimi's first two films, despite the lack of Spidey banter, felt like Spidey and his world. There was a sweetness to those first two Raimi films, and Peter is essentially a sweet guy. Yeah, tragic things happen to him, but he is not defined by those tragedies. He was raised by two wonderful people who gave him a strong sense of optimism. These last two films - the first one more so - feel so cynical and sometimes cold. In the first Webb film Peter is aloof and seems to regard Uncle Ben with contempt, which is totally wrong because Peter should regard Uncle Ben as a father and love and look up to him as such. So Sony's top priority needs to be getting Peter right again as well as the tone and feeling of Peter's world. Of course, it would be best if they simply relinquished creative control to Marvel Studios.

  13. #43
    Incredible Member Majesty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DCCoolness View Post
    Why Sony and Marvel have to let their egos get in the way. Like, one studio wants to have control of this, the other one wants to have control of that. Why not shake hands and do the crossover?

    I think they changed their minds about putting them in the same universe (if it was true to begin with)

    "Amazing Spider-Man 3" and "Captain America: Civil War" are reportedly both going to be filmed in Atlanta.

    So we'll see...



    Another thing I will say is the casting of the main cast in the Amazing Spider-Man movies was perfect. Garfield as Peter, Emma Stone and Gwen Stacy. Uncle Ben.

    But to me.. the greatest casting was Sally Fields as Aunt May. The chemistry her and Peter have in those movies are so beautiful and the best parts of the film and they really tug at your heart strings. They have their funny moments and their touching moments and like in the comic it's obvious to tell that she 'knows' Peter is Spider-Man just as she told him in the comics she had known for quite some time.


    But the casting is what makes that movies fantastic or give it the potential for something fantastic. If they had the proper writers and SONY stopped messing with Webb's vision and cutting half the things he puts in the movie(look at the movie previews, there's several scenes that are important in the trailer that you don't see in the films). Then the movies would do much better.


    But I have a feeling we'll be in for a bit of a surprise if the news about Civil War and ASM3 filming in Atlanta are both true.

    Also the Avengers Age of Ultron reshoots they are doing right now. Could it be a Spider-Man cameo? We don't know..we'll have to see.
    Last edited by Majesty; 01-07-2015 at 03:56 PM.

  14. #44
    Rookie Member BlueFlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Majesty View Post
    "Amazing Spider-Man 3" and "Captain America: Civil War" are reportedly both going to be filmed in Atlanta.

    So we'll see...



    Another thing I will say is the casting of the main cast in the Amazing Spider-Man movies was perfect. Garfield as Peter, Emma Stone and Gwen Stacy. Uncle Ben.

    But to me.. the greatest casting was Sally Fields as Aunt May. The chemistry her and Peter have in those movies are so beautiful and the best parts of the film and they really tug at your heart strings. They have their funny moments and their touching moments and like in the comic it's obvious to tell that she 'knows' Peter is Spider-Man just as she told him in the comics she had known for quite some time.


    But the casting is what makes that movies fantastic or give it the potential for something fantastic. If they had the proper writers and SONY stopped messing with Webb's vision and cutting half the things he puts in the movie(look at the movie previews, there's several scenes that are important in the trailer that you don't see in the films). Then the movies would do much better.


    But I have a feeling we'll be in for a bit of a surprise if the news about Civil War and ASM3 filming in Atlanta are both true.

    Also the Avengers Age of Ultron reshoots they are doing right now. Could it be a Spider-Man cameo? We don't know..we'll have to see.
    The Aunt May/Peter scenes were the highlights of the film, with the Spider-Man sequences coming in second. As much as the first film failed with the Uncle Ben/Peter relationship, it succeeded Aunt May/Peter in the second film and some parts of the first film. THAT relationship felt most true to the source material.

  15. #45
    Fantastic Member Choos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    363

    Default

    I am disappointed, I thought Garfield was a fine Spider-Man... Strangely confident and muttering Peter Parker but a fine Spider-Man who could have been made to fit well with the cinematic 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
  •