Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 89
  1. #46
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    The ASM films cost more, and made less, than the Raimi films. This is not an opinion. This is fact. Hollywood is a business first and foremost. If you like the ASM films, that's fine. But a lot of people did not. And we are learning what went wrong with the ASM films.

    (And yes, I still say Stone was miscast as Gwen. She should have been MJ. We should have had MJ and Gwen instead of stuff about Peter's parents. As is, they ruined the ending of the Death of Gwen Stacy story.)
    alot of people think ti was bad? that's hater talk and an exaggeration. TASM 1 was postively recieved and TASM 2 was claimed to be better than SM 3 even some loving and liking TASM 2. if you like SM 3 then i'll say that SM 3 was recieved negatively by alot of people.

    and what's with that last sentence with "we are learning what went wrong with TASM films?" do you mean by the emails or do you actually think what went wrong because that is another exaggeration.

    i think not having mj as the first love interest and having her come around later was nothing wrong since she did serve a purpose in the mythos later on.

    the death may not have been well builded up. maybe it was originally but maybe the leaks will tell us. however the death itself was well handled and well executed.

  2. #47
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Keeper of the Crows View Post
    Agreed, although from my perspective that's a good thing, since it means the discontinuation of the TASM franchise and the beginning of MCU/Feige Spider-Man.
    if only they would kept Andrew or just make the sequel better instead of just pretending that TASM series was a mistake even though it wasn't really all that much of a mistake but hiring Avi Arad was the biggest mistake.

    i believe they should also release the re-edited versions of TASM films since with everything the cast and crew went through even Andrew they all deserve much credit. i mean let Marc have a job at marvel. you let him do the latest short film on a commercial for you guys how about letting him do a netflix series?

  3. #48
    I'm great at boats! Alastor's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    497

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    The ASM films cost more, and made less, than the Raimi films. This is not an opinion. This is fact.
    Actually, Spider-Man 3 beats The Amazing Spider-Man 2 by 3 million US dollars in terms of production costs (at least according to Wikipedia), but it's also the most successful Spider-Man movie to date, so your point still stands. Fan or critical reception doesn't mean squat compared to revenue, that's why we keep getting new Transformers sequels every couple of years.

    As for the ASM franchise missing any direction beyond the second movie, I wouldn't have been surprised if they had announced a Hunger Games type of story for ASM 3. Spider-Man being integrated into the MCU was in my opinion the best possible outcome and I'm excited what Feige et al. can bring to the table.
    "Tell me there's something better. Go ahead, try."

  4. #49
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alastor View Post
    Actually, Spider-Man 3 beats The Amazing Spider-Man 2 by 3 million US dollars in terms of production costs (at least according to Wikipedia), but it's also the most successful Spider-Man movie to date, so your point still stands. Fan or critical reception doesn't mean squat compared to revenue, that's why we keep getting new Transformers sequels every couple of years.

    As for the ASM franchise missing any direction beyond the second movie, I wouldn't have been surprised if they had announced a Hunger Games type of story for ASM 3. Spider-Man being integrated into the MCU was in my opinion the best possible outcome and I'm excited what Feige et al. can bring to the table.
    i believe they should've listened to fiege during TASM 2's production minus the sutff with garfield, the security camera's on peter, and the crime on the streets.

  5. #50
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    alot of people think ti was bad? that's hater talk and an exaggeration. TASM 1 was postively recieved and TASM 2 was claimed to be better than SM 3 even some loving and liking TASM 2. if you like SM 3 then i'll say that SM 3 was recieved negatively by alot of people.

    and what's with that last sentence with "we are learning what went wrong with TASM films?" do you mean by the emails or do you actually think what went wrong because that is another exaggeration.

    i think not having mj as the first love interest and having her come around later was nothing wrong since she did serve a purpose in the mythos later on.

    the death may not have been well builded up. maybe it was originally but maybe the leaks will tell us. however the death itself was well handled and well executed.
    I think your enjoyment of those movies are covering your perception. Even the woman who was in charge of the studio didn't like ASM 2. Brushing it all aside as "hater talk" means you aren't trying to have a discussion.

    But yes. Something what wrong with the ASM films. Why was the parents subplot a thing if nobody liked them?

    MJ serves a purpose in the story of Gwen's death. Casting Emma Stone as "Spider-Man's dead girlfriend" was a mistake of the highest order. A waste of talent. And they cut out MJ for what? So we could get more stuff with Peter's parents.

    (These movies were horrible.)

  6. #51
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    I think your enjoyment of those movies are covering your perception. Even the woman who was in charge of the studio didn't like ASM 2. Brushing it all aside as "hater talk" means you aren't trying to have a discussion.

    But yes. Something what wrong with the ASM films. Why was the parents subplot a thing if nobody liked them?

    MJ serves a purpose in the story of Gwen's death. Casting Emma Stone as "Spider-Man's dead girlfriend" was a mistake of the highest order. A waste of talent. And they cut out MJ for what? So we could get more stuff with Peter's parents.

    (These movies were horrible.)
    It's okay not to like a movie but with how Amy Pascal talks about the film and bringing the cast and crew into this and not putting MOST of the blame on Arad that's saying something. It's most likely just saying some of the things haters say when concern with the cast and crew even thought they were well recieved by many.

    Nobody liked them in TASM 2. Sure they had a problem with them in the first amazing spiderman but that's only because well Sony cut them out. It's not much to say they suck but rather than that the producers waste them around.


    MJ was originally there for a few short scenes for fitting in the theme of time and moving on in the sequel. Yeah Emma was miscast but like everyone said she was an excellent Gwen. I'm sure someone like Jane levy wouldve fit better for MJ in the sequels.

    And no they don't suck that much.

  7. #52
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    It's okay not to like a movie but with how Amy Pascal talks about the film and bringing the cast and crew into this and not putting MOST of the blame on Arad that's saying something. It's most likely just saying some of the things haters say when concern with the cast and crew even thought they were well recieved by many.

    Nobody liked them in TASM 2. Sure they had a problem with them in the first amazing spiderman but that's only because well Sony cut them out. It's not much to say they suck but rather than that the producers waste them around.


    MJ was originally there for a few short scenes for fitting in the theme of time and moving on in the sequel. Yeah Emma was miscast but like everyone said she was an excellent Gwen. I'm sure someone like Jane levy wouldve fit better for MJ in the sequels.

    And no they don't suck that much.
    Someone with a position like Pascal had has to look at the big picture. Considering she asked Raimi for help with "you know who," I think it's pretty obvious who she was talking about.

    But the concept of good actors in bad material seems foreign to you. This is not a new concept. Good actors do bad movies all the time. No matter how you try to explain it away, they made bad calls. That's why we have the parents subplot at all.

    Emma Stone should never have played Gwen. She should have been MJ. It was a waste to make her play "Spider-Man's dead girlfriend." All it did was ignite ship wars. It didn't make for a better movie. It made for a worse fandom.

    These movies sucked.

  8. #53
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    Someone with a position like Pascal had has to look at the big picture. Considering she asked Raimi for help with "you know who," I think it's pretty obvious who she was talking about.

    But the concept of good actors in bad material seems foreign to you. This is not a new concept. Good actors do bad movies all the time. No matter how you try to explain it away, they made bad calls. That's why we have the parents subplot at all.

    Emma Stone should never have played Gwen. She should have been MJ. It was a waste to make her play "Spider-Man's dead girlfriend." All it did was ignite ship wars. It didn't make for a better movie. It made for a worse fandom.

    These movies sucked.
    Yeah bringing raimi back abd the. Maguire abd then thought about this spider verse movie abd some things. She just reads too much. If you hired someone like Goddard why not use him? It's like you read into these things too much. Also was t she the person. Who compared Raimi's work to scheumacher or something? That really doesn't make yours and her argument any better. She's basically not thinking straight.

    Again, she's faulting the actors in general. Yes the parents subplot was unnnecccesary but that's due to bad editing abd the execution based on the man in charge( avi arad). The actors were widely praised with the characters especially abd most Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone abd yes I can give reasons as to why else they're well recieved like being more human, having spiderman done righ, the romance being well written and executed, the charisma, the chemistry between the characters and actors, etc. this has not I g to do with the parents subor. We can say what else we liked about the movies abd nothing else. The first movie was well recieved abd while the second was not as much was still proven to be better than SM 3. Please try not to let your ignorance blind you.

    Dude, we had ship wars all the time. It's nothing that could effect the fandom. The MCU is pretty much changing alot of things anyway and we are getting RNYVs so there's rely nothing much effecting the comics.

  9. #54
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    Yeah bringing raimi back abd the. Maguire abd then thought about this spider verse movie abd some things. She just reads too much. If you hired someone like Goddard why not use him? It's like you read into these things too much. Also was t she the person. Who compared Raimi's work to scheumacher or something? That really doesn't make yours and her argument any better. She's basically not thinking straight.

    Again, she's faulting the actors in general. Yes the parents subplot was unnnecccesary but that's due to bad editing abd the execution based on the man in charge( avi arad). The actors were widely praised with the characters especially abd most Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone abd yes I can give reasons as to why else they're well recieved like being more human, having spiderman done righ, the romance being well written and executed, the charisma, the chemistry between the characters and actors, etc. this has not I g to do with the parents subor. We can say what else we liked about the movies abd nothing else. The first movie was well recieved abd while the second was not as much was still proven to be better than SM 3. Please try not to let your ignorance blind you.

    Dude, we had ship wars all the time. It's nothing that could effect the fandom. The MCU is pretty much changing alot of things anyway and we are getting RNYVs so there's rely nothing much effecting the comics.
    Movie execs having weird, contradictory ideas isn't exactly news.

    But if people loved these movies as much as you do, Sony wouldn't have made that deal with Marvel and thrown their potential "Amazing" franchise out after two films. Most people I've talked to who have seen these movies either kind of like them or were indifferent to them (but everyone hated that they did the Uncle Ben stuff again). But that's anecdotal evidence and doesn't really mean much. What it comes down to is results. And the results were as we discussed. That these movies ultimately cost more, and made less, than the Raimi films.

    I get that you like Garfield and Stone. They'll be fine. They're big Hollywood stars. (Garfield's gonna be in a Martin Scorsese film.)

  10. #55
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    Movie execs having weird, contradictory ideas isn't exactly news.

    But if people loved these movies as much as you do, Sony wouldn't have made that deal with Marvel and thrown their potential "Amazing" franchise out after two films. Most people I've talked to who have seen these movies either kind of like them or were indifferent to them (but everyone hated that they did the Uncle Ben stuff again). But that's anecdotal evidence and doesn't really mean much. What it comes down to is results. And the results were as we discussed. That these movies ultimately cost more, and made less, than the Raimi films.

    I get that you like Garfield and Stone. They'll be fine. They're big Hollywood stars. (Garfield's gonna be in a Martin Scorsese film.)
    Yes it isn't news but from what I'm seeing you took her advice way too hard.

    The first Webb film didnt make much money because people were really unfair to the reboot at the time.

    The second movie didnt do well because of overmarketing and yes the reviews.

    The reason the y had to reboot was because if rights issues. Even if they had better reviews fir TASM 2 but still the sam weak box office numbers the sound have still reboot the series again. They mainly sold the rights because they were in need of financial help. Sony was in major need of money so they had no choice but to sign the deal with marvel.

    And why were they tired of the uncle ben death. You knew he was gonna die so why would this not be a surprise?

    Yeah he's gonna do great and alot of people love him as spiderman but i di feel like this is incomplete. as a big spiderman fan i really love to see his full credit as spiderman which is the reason i hope they release a re-edited version of TASM films.

  11. #56
    Really Feeling It! Kevinroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    8,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marvelguy25 View Post
    Yes it isn't news but from what I'm seeing you took her advice way too hard.

    The first Webb film didnt make much money because people were really unfair to the reboot at the time.

    The second movie didnt do well because of overmarketing and yes the reviews.

    The reason the y had to reboot was because if rights issues. Even if they had better reviews fir TASM 2 but still the sam weak box office numbers the sound have still reboot the series again. They mainly sold the rights because they were in need of financial help. Sony was in major need of money so they had no choice but to sign the deal with marvel.

    And why were they tired of the uncle ben death. You knew he was gonna die so why would this not be a surprise?

    Yeah he's gonna do great and alot of people love him as spiderman but i di feel like this is incomplete. as a big spiderman fan i really love to see his full credit as spiderman which is the reason i hope they release a re-edited version of TASM films.
    There's some misinformation in this post. I was mainly surprised how many people criticized the parents subplot. That people from Marvel criticized it. And now we learn that even people at Sony hated it.

    The thing is the reboot was supposed to turn the franchise around. Turn perceptions around. It didn't. This wasn't an X-Men: First Class. TASM 2 cost more and made less than TASM 1. So that comparison doesn't work. Also, "overmarketing" and "reviews" aren't as damaging as you seem to think. Otherwise the Transformers movies wouldn't still be a thing.

    Sony also didn't "sell" the rights to Marvel. Sony is still producing Spider-Man films. What Marvel gets is the rights to use Spider-Man in their own films. So you can see Spidey in Civil War and Infinity War and who knows what else. It allows Sony to do something no other movie studio can do. It attaches them to the highest grossing film franchise out there. (The MCU just overtook Harry Potter as the #1 film franchise.)

    I don't expect we'll ever see much in the way of a director's cut of the ASM films. The move will be to focus on the new Spider-Man films going forward.
    Last edited by Kevinroc; 05-05-2015 at 12:34 AM.

  12. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    The thing is the reboot was supposed to turn the franchise around. Turn perceptions around.
    That's not entirely accurate.

    The reboot happened mainly because Raimi dragged his feet and couldn't give Sony what they wanted, which was a Spider-Man film produced by a specific date, which on Sony's end was to ensure the rights didn't revert back to Marvel. There were also reportedly story disagreements between Raimi and Sony, specifically what villain to use for the next film. I'm not blaming Raimi for any of this, mind you. I just think it's pretty clear that many involved with the Spider-Man film franchise wanted to continue with Raimi but Raimi wasn't necessarily in a hurry to continue with Spider-Man.

    Also keep in mind that Sony went with the reboot because they were TRYING (key word) to drop production costs but the MCU essentially prevented that from happening. Marvel Studios forced Sony to compete against them when really they should have been collaborating with each other.

  13. #58
    Newbie Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    7

    Default

    No one did, lol

  14. #59
    Loony Scott Taylor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Running Springs, California
    Posts
    5,390

    Default

    The parent material in the ASM movies was just a horrible, stupid decision. No amount of editing could have made their presence better. The franchise was supposedly patterned after USM but even Bendis knew better than to make the parents into anything but a minor plot point once in a blue moon.

    Whoever decided the parents were a good idea in ASM should really have their Spider-Man fan card revoked.
    Every day is a gift, not a given right.

  15. #60
    BANNED
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,647

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kevinroc View Post
    There's some misinformation in this post. I was mainly surprised how many people criticized the parents subplot. That people from Marvel criticized it. And now we learn that even people at Sony hated it.

    The thing is the reboot was supposed to turn the franchise around. Turn perceptions around. It didn't. This wasn't an X-Men: First Class. TASM 2 cost more and made less than TASM 1. So that comparison doesn't work. Also, "overmarketing" and "reviews" aren't as damaging as you seem to think. Otherwise the Transformers movies wouldn't still be a thing.

    Sony also didn't "sell" the rights to Marvel. Sony is still producing Spider-Man films. What Marvel gets is the rights to use Spider-Man in their own films. So you can see Spidey in Civil War and Infinity War and who knows what else. It allows Sony to do something no other movie studio can do. It attaches them to the highest grossing film franchise out there. (The MCU just overtook Harry Potter as the #1 film franchise.)

    I don't expect we'll ever see much in the way of a director's cut of the ASM films. The move will be to focus on the new Spider-Man films going forward.
    the people criticized it for how it's used and sony only ciriticzed it because they realized what they did was a mistka eeven though it was the fault of the editing and them letting avi arad be in charge.

    the series was also made to keep the rights as well as why first class was made as well as the wolverine movies. the transformers movies made alot more money than you realize. next time do your research before making a comment like that.

    same thing based on rights issues. even though they collaborated with eachtoher they have no choice but to reboot. you'd see the same thing happening to the x-men if it was possible.

    i believe we'll see a directors cut of both TASM films. Marvel knows the actors are owed that much.

Posting Permissions

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