spiderman 2

[JohnT]

Or Star Wars. Or Star Trek. Even the LOTR movies were running out of steam at the end.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Superhero movies are a bit different, because they usually have so many villians that it seems they can go on for 6, 7, 8 films easy... but the temptation must be resisted! In other types of movies, you may simply just run out of story to tell.

[OzzyKP]

Naw, the problem with Batman wasn't that they made too many movies, it was that they tried to cram too much into the movies.

That's what Spider-Man is purposely avoiding. It is tempting to please all the fanboys who really want to see Electro, Scorpian, Rhino, etc etc, up on the big screen, but when you stick them all up there together then they are empty characters. Like Batman movies with Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, Robin, Bane and such all in the same movie. Just doesn't work.

Spider-Man is going slow, and they could just keep going for years. They want to make it an on going franchise like James Bond. As long as they take as much care to develop real characters and plausible storylines, go for it.

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by 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???

Of coursem ever since JMS took over Amazing Spider-Man, Spidey's orgin was changed drastically. And this is canon.

Yep, he's a Spider-deity or something.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Naw, the problem with Batman wasn't that they made too many movies, it was that they tried to cram too much into the movies.

I disagree. I think they made too many movies, especially after Michael Keaton left. Batman was then a new actor for every movie. It was getting stale and old as the backstory was the same and wasn't progressing. A movie franchise has problems lasting after the 3rd one, even a great franchise. A lot of times the 2nd one is the peak and it goes downhill from here.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I disagree. I think they made too many movies,

Joel Schumacher killed Batman, not making more movies.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I think after a while people tire of the sequalitis. Superman suffered the same fate as Batman and you can blame what you will, but any movie series has only a few go around before it starts getting stale.

[The Mad Monk]

...while TV series can go on and on and on...

[Jon Miller]

and on and ona ndo ond

and someuindlty no one is watjcon htem

Jon Mller

[Imran Siddiqui]

...while TV series can go on and on and on...

It's easier for TV series. There is much more room for episodes where nothing really happens and there is a lot of character building instead... or its shlock and campy stuff (think of the original Batman show).

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
and on and ona ndo ond

and someuindlty no one is watjcon htem

Jon Mller

You can say that again.

[SpencerH]

George Clooney killed Batman.

[OzzyKP]

Naw, it was Val Kilmer and more so Joel Schumacher.

If Spider-Man keeps the same elements in tact, and doesn't get some lame ass director like Schumacher, then I see no reason why it can't continue for many films. I mean nothing at all has changed about James Bond, but they've been making those movies for 40-50 years.

[Jac de Molay]

Originally posted by SpencerH
George Clooney killed Batman.

He did? Right now, they're filming Batman Begins, with Christian Bale playing the younger hero. It's supposed to be a darker, more gothic, rendition more influenced by the early comics.

I don't think it's dead, but they need to quit treating it like kid's stuff, ala Phantom Menace.

[SpencerH]

Clooney was too much of a nice guy. These Batman(s) owe more to 'The dark knight' than the original Batman and it requires a certain type of 'psycho' temperament to pull it off. Michael Keaton was good in that way. As Bruce Wayne he was a likeable guy but as Batman he had 'killer' in his eyes.