spiderman 2

[Dis]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I thought SM1 was a very fine movie. Excellent acting. Especially by Kristin Dunst.

Especially all the origin stuff, it was handled quite well. You really got a feeling for who Parker was, his humble background and you felt for him as an outcast and a nerd. Building from that you can really appreciate his powers and the importance of that.

He, like most others in the movie, were three dimentional characters who you could really understand. Say that about another comic book movie.

Batman?

I haven't yet seen the Superman movies, but I am highly doubtful they are anywhere near as good as these two Spider-man flicks. Of course it'd be downright ignorant of me to condemn a movie I haven't even seen yet.......

you haven't seen the superman movies? What kind of freak are you! Kids!

Superman 1 and 2 were pretty good. The rest were crap.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
You should read Ultimate Spiderman.

THEY REWROTE THE CANON!?

[Imran Siddiqui]

It's comics, they ALWAYS rewrite canon .

[The Mad Monk]

That's one hell of a thing to rewrite. That storyline was one of the all-time classic examples of comics as literature! WTF was their justification???

[Imran Siddiqui]

What do you mean that's a Hell of a thing to rewrite? Haven't you ever heard of 'new' series in comics which basically takes the characters and backstory and rewrites the entire story? I believe the X-Men one is most well known, and IIRC, the movies mostly take from the rewrite.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
That's one hell of a thing to rewrite.

They didn't rewrite canon.

[DinoDoc]

For the less nerdish among us, Ultimate titles put out by Marvel that are basically updates of established characters and doesn't effect the established canon.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
What do you mean that's a Hell of a thing to rewrite? Haven't you ever heard of 'new' series in comics which basically takes the characters and backstory and rewrites the entire story? I believe the X-Men one is most well known, and IIRC, the movies mostly take from the rewrite.

I don't read the X-Men anymore.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
For the less nerdish among us, Ultimate titles put out by Marvel that are basically updates of established characters and doesn't effect the established canon.

So the stories are set in "the past"? That's alright, then.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
I thought SM1 was a very fine movie. Excellent acting. Especially by Kristin Dunst.

Especially all the origin stuff, it was handled quite well. You really got a feeling for who Parker was, his humble background and you felt for him as an outcast and a nerd. Building from that you can really appreciate his powers and the importance of that.

He, like most others in the movie, were three dimentional characters who you could really understand. Say that about another comic book movie.

Batman?

I haven't yet seen the Superman movies, but I am highly doubtful they are anywhere near as good as these two Spider-man flicks. Of course it'd be downright ignorant of me to condemn a movie I haven't even seen yet.......

The original Superman is the film to which all other comic-book movies aspire. And I will say it: SM did have three-dimensional characters whom you could understand, especially Clarke/Superman.

I recommend it highly. One warning: watch the first minute of credits as to get a feel for the Superman theme, then fast forward until you see Krypton on the screen. I believe that SM still holds the records for both the longest opening and closing credit sequences.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
So the stories are set in "the past"? That's alright, then.

Amazing Spider-Man and Spider-Man are two titles that were renumbered (Vol. 2 now) but are continuing the same story line going straight since '63. Same cannon, same history, nothing changed. On the rare occasion I buy a comic, these are the ones I go for.

Ultimate Spider-man (and they may be others, I dunno), in order to be more accessable to new fans who don't have time to learn 40 years worth of history, have restarted the story as if Spider-man was in high school right now, in the 00's and just got bit by a (maybe not radioactive, but probably genetically altered spider, like the movie) spider.

So in Ultimate there are some differences. I hear that Aunt May and Uncle Ben are old hippies, hehe. Its a good idea, to keep it relevent to a new generation and to bring new people on board after the movies.

But for us old timers, don't fear, just totally ignore Ultimate, (like I'm doing) and keep buying Amazing and Spider-Man.

[OzzyKP]

Also, Spider-Man 2 made 40.4 million on Wednesday, busting the old opening day record set by Spider-Man 1 in 2002 of 39.5 million.



This weekend we'll have to see if the flick can top Shrek 2's biggest 1 day haul. Go Spidey!

[SpencerH]

My only complaint about the first movie was killing off the green goblin. He and Doc oc were the best villains from the early comics. I'd like to see some of the other classics in one movie (Rhino, Scorpion, Lizard, Electro) before we get into Venom and Carnage.

[OzzyKP]

Well no one ever stays dead of course. Plus its a movie, there needs to be some resolution at the end. Furthermore, with all the cool villians out there, we wouldn't want Green Goblin and Doc Ock to keep popping up. Lets move on to others.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, and you don't want TOOO many movies. That always kills a Superhero franchise... look at the latest Batman movies (shudder).