Jump to content
IGNORED

Spiderman 2

Thread Owner

By Thread Owner
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted

I'm looking forward to Spidey 2, but I still get short pangs of pain over Tobey Maguire's interpretation of Peter Parker. It's not that it's a bad performance, it's just not the Peter Parker I grew up with, you know? He's like an alternative Peter Parker. He's a Ben Reilly, if you will :P

That Von Trappe kid's Spidey performance in the live-action TV series was closer to my vision. He had the correct mannerisms and terrible hair. Oh, and I really hope they leave out the dreadful rawk soundtrack. That'll only help age the films. For me, the 70's cartoon had the perfect Spidey sounds. The sultry jazz badness suited New York a whole lot better than Chad Kreuger and Silent Bob fannying about on rooftops :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted
Aaaargh. Can open. Clones Everywhere...

:D

Yeah, let's hope the Spidey films don't follow that particular plotline up for future sequels. It'd make a fuckng ace TV spin-off, though. Straight up! I liked the characters in Reilly's personal life, when he worked in a coffee shop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JPickford (retired mod)

JPickford (retired mod)

Posted
Posted
I'm looking forward to Spidey 2, but I still get short pangs of pain over Tobey Maguire's interpretation of Peter Parker. It's not that it's a bad performance, it's just not the Peter Parker I grew up with, you know? He's like an alternative Peter Parker. He's a Ben Reilly, if you will :D

He's EXACTLY like the Peter Parker of the comics I read as a kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted

Yeah, well, you're old. I started reading Spidey when it was Todd Macfarlane writing and drawing. By which time Peter wasn't a soft chinned sap. :D

For me, a lot of what Spidey is about is cockiness and cheeky quips. I can't imagine Maguire's Parker, even behind the mask, having the balls to call his foes 'pal' mid-battle. His voice is just too meek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted
Maguire is a great Peter Parker. The end. :D

Nah, let's argue some! I did like his performance but deep down something didn't quite seem right. I think I would have quite liked to see Jake Gyllenhaal given the webs. I think his Donnie Darko was kinda close to how I imagined Peter Parker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ste Pickford

Ste Pickford

Posted
Posted
Yeah, well, you're old. I started reading Spidey when it was Todd Macfarlane writing and drawing. By which time Peter wasn't a soft chinned sap. :D

For me, a lot of what Spidey is about is cockiness and cheeky quips. I can't imagine Maguire's Parker, even behind the mask, having the balls to call his foes 'pal' mid-battle. His voice is just too meek.

Kids!

If you're gonna do spiderman from the start, then of course his character should match how he started. The peter parker you were reading was the peter parker with years of superheroing under his belt, he could be cocky and confident. The peter parker in the movie was just starting out.

nah, thinking about it, I don't think marvel planned a character development arc over multiple decades... Its just that the spiderman film was so... right.. so perfect... you just read the wrong comics.... :P

... and the second one is going to be better? Yikes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted

I did read all the major storylines and the origin story from the Stan Lee, Jack Kirby and Jon Romita Snr days. I got a bunch of those classic compilation paperbacks. B)

Well, I guess you are kind of pseudo-right in saying the movie Peter was similar to the Peter in those stories, but Caleb Newcastle calls it absolutely correct where he says there wasn't enough cheek from Spidey as he fought. Let's face it: the fights in the comics are all about the dialogue and puns. I'm actually of the opinion that it is the Peter Parker sections that are most compelling. This is true of both the comics and the movie. I'm hoping for more Aunt May, Jameson and MJ in the sequel. I'm not really fussed about the action at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liquid Myth

Liquid Myth

Posted
Posted

Classic reviews:

The first

The second

Quote from the first:

"Parker's mutation happens during a party, his DNA changing after ingesting large amounts of Vodka, smoking several rocks of crack cocaine, injecting horse tranquilizers and licking several radioactive spiders. And therein lies the beauty of the Spider-Man story for the American male: It could happen to any of them."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ste Pickford

Ste Pickford

Posted
Posted
... I'm actually of the opinion that it is the Peter Parker sections that are most compelling. This is true of both the comics and the movie. I'm hoping for more Aunt May, Jameson and MJ in the sequel. I'm not really fussed about the action at all.

agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goose

Goose

Posted
Posted

Latest reviews by way of IMDb.com

Critics seem to agree: Spider-Man 2 (which opens at midnight tonight in most cities) is a marvel. Most of their reviews are packed with apparently shameless hyperbole.

For example, Roger Ebert writes in the Chicago Sun-Times: "Spider-Man 2 is the best superhero movie since the modern genre was launched with Superman. It succeeds by being true to the insight that allowed Marvel Comics to upturn decades of comic-book tradition: Readers could identify more completely with heroes like themselves than with remote godlike paragons."

Lou Lumenick writes similarly in the New York Post: "Sequels don't get much better -- or smarter -- than the action-, drama-, romance- and comedy-packed Spider-Man 2, which miraculously improves on the webslinger's hugely popular first screen adventure in every imaginable department." Glenn Whipp's judgment in the Los Angeles Daily News: "Best comic book movie -- ever. Really nothing comes close, which is both a commentary on the empty-headed manner with which the genre is generally approached and on the amazing achievement of [director] Sam Raimi's sequel."

A.O. Scott in the New York Times observes that the film provides a striking example "of what vibrant, intelligent and sincere popular filmmaking looks like."

Mark Caro in the Chicago Tribune even admits to being wrong when he remarked in his review of the original Spider-Man that a sequel was a dubious proposition since by the end of the first movie, "the tank seems nearly empty." Says Caro: "Spider-Man 2 gives comic book movies, sequels and summer popcorn flicks a good name." Mike Clark in USA Today calls it simply, "an uncommonly entertaining movie"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Calashnikov

Calashnikov

Posted
Posted
Latest reviews by way of IMDb.com

Critics seem to agree: Spider-Man 2 (which opens at midnight tonight in most cities) is a marvel. Most of their reviews are packed with apparently shameless hyperbole.

For example, Roger Ebert writes in the Chicago Sun-Times: "Spider-Man 2 is the best superhero movie since the modern genre was launched with Superman. It succeeds by being true to the insight that allowed Marvel Comics to upturn decades of comic-book tradition: Readers could identify more completely with heroes like themselves than with remote godlike paragons."

Lou Lumenick writes similarly in the New York Post: "Sequels don't get much better -- or smarter -- than the action-, drama-, romance- and comedy-packed Spider-Man 2, which miraculously improves on the webslinger's hugely popular first screen adventure in every imaginable department." Glenn Whipp's judgment in the Los Angeles Daily News: "Best comic book movie -- ever. Really nothing comes close, which is both a commentary on the empty-headed manner with which the genre is generally approached and on the amazing achievement of [director] Sam Raimi's sequel."

A.O. Scott in the New York Times observes that the film provides a striking example "of what vibrant, intelligent and sincere popular filmmaking looks like."

Mark Caro in the Chicago Tribune even admits to being wrong when he remarked in his review of the original Spider-Man that a sequel was a dubious proposition since by the end of the first movie, "the tank seems nearly empty." Says Caro: "Spider-Man 2 gives comic book movies, sequels and summer popcorn flicks a good name." Mike Clark in USA Today calls it simply, "an uncommonly entertaining movie"

OH MAN, I CAN'T WAIT!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade

Comrade

Posted
Posted

My only problem with this film is that the trailer spoiled reams of the plot for me. From the trailer I know that Parker was getting fed up of being Spiderman, as it was interfering with his proper life and everything. So he quits, and chucks the suit in the bin. He feels a bit guilty when seeing stuff like fires and that, but his relationship with Mary Jane is getting better so he sticks with it. Meanwhile, Doc Oc has turned up and has made some kind of deal with Pete's flatmate to get Spiderman by kidnapping MJ and then getting Parker to lead him to spidey in return for her release. So then Parker decides to resurrect Spidey and fights Oc.

That's got to be at least half (probably 2/3) of the film already. Honestly, I just wish that trailers would be a bit vaguer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Phelan

Phelan

Posted
Posted
My only problem with this film is that the trailer spoiled reams of the plot for me. From the trailer I know that Parker was getting fed up of being Spiderman, as it was interfering with his proper life and everything. So he quits, and chucks the suit in the bin. He feels a bit guilty when seeing stuff like fires and that, but his relationship with Mary Jane is getting better so he sticks with it. Meanwhile, Doc Oc has turned up and has made some kind of deal with Pete's flatmate to get Spiderman by kidnapping MJ and then getting Parker to lead him to spidey in return for her release. So then Parker decides to resurrect Spidey and fights Oc.

That's got to be at least half (probably 2/3) of the film already. Honestly, I just wish that trailers would be a bit vaguer.

I agree.

I'm getting sick of trailers having everything in it. All I want is a snip to leave me begging for more not the whole damn film edited so understand the whole story and ending.

I am looking forward to this though :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC Lemon

DC Lemon

Posted
Posted
The CGI in the trailer still looks a touch off though IMO.  :P

Yes, people are getting excited over the film in this thread but when I watched the trailer this aspect put me off the film - being someone who doesn't care that much for comic book superheroes but who enjoyed the first one well enough. After watching the trailer, I came up with the following list:

Cons:

Ropey CGI

Pros:

Kirsten Dunst

So I'll forgive the ropey CGI.

If Dunst were a pro I'd be a kerbcrawler, for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qloudZ

qloudZ

Posted
Posted
My only problem with this film is that the trailer spoiled reams of the plot for me. From the trailer I know that Parker was getting fed up of being Spiderman, as it was interfering with his proper life and everything. So he quits, and chucks the suit in the bin. He feels a bit guilty when seeing stuff like fires and that, but his relationship with Mary Jane is getting better so he sticks with it. Meanwhile, Doc Oc has turned up and has made some kind of deal with Pete's flatmate to get Spiderman by kidnapping MJ and then getting Parker to lead him to spidey in return for her release. So then Parker decides to resurrect Spidey and fights Oc.

That's got to be at least half (probably 2/3) of the film already. Honestly, I just wish that trailers would be a bit vaguer.

I've you've read the comics or watched the cartoon then you'll know pretty much the whole plot anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nomore29

nomore29

Posted
Posted
I hope both of you 'go' see it in the cinema too. :(

Of course. This is a movie that has to be seen on the big screen with a giant coke and a tub of popcorn.

And when the DVD comes out it will make a perfect companion for my first Spiderman-dvd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept