|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 9, 2012 23:18:05 GMT -5
Half of the info I read from the book (I didn't buy it, but read most of it at the bookstore), the other stuff I got from the interviews & articles on the web, and from the commentaries. If I recall right, Laura Ziskin the producer said that MJ was done, but that when it turned out Howard was pregnant (by everyone's suprise), they knew that they couldn't hang her on the bars/etc. later on- and got the actress who played MJ to come back.
In any case....yeah.... having Gwen instead of MJ for the last half of the movie would have made a LOT more sense (and feel far less repetitive) for the last act of the film. The commentary also adds other bits here and there that was filmed, that I wish they had put back in (Gwen slaps Peter at the end of the bar bit; there's a bit where Topher Grace's character tries to visit Gwen at her home, but is stopped by Captain Stacey; wonder if they'll do an extended version.... it could use it, for sure)
|
|
Gandy
New Member
Admiral
Owner & Creator of Superman Cinema
Posts: 17,343
|
Post by Gandy on Jan 15, 2012 10:59:40 GMT -5
If you were to try to do a fan cut that makes STM and S2 into one big movie, what would you do? In STM, what would you cut out? And which parts of S2 would you keep? Please? Personally, I would cut out all footage of Lois dying and turning the world back. I'd also get rid of the ending where Superman drops Luthor and Otis in jail. Uh, cutting out Lois dying kills the film and robs it of any emotional resonance. Without Lois dying, the earthquake sequence has no drama for its main protagonists. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823 
|
Post by atp on Jan 15, 2012 11:25:38 GMT -5
If you were to try to do a fan cut that makes STM and S2 into one big movie, what would you do? In STM, what would you cut out? And which parts of S2 would you keep? Please? Personally, I would cut out all footage of Lois dying and turning the world back. I'd also get rid of the ending where Superman drops Luthor and Otis in jail. Uh, cutting out Lois dying kills the film and robs it of any emotional resonance. Without Lois dying, the earthquake sequence has no drama for its main protagonists. I'd actually cut out the whole earthquake sequence too. In fact, I think STM can do without pretty much everything after the interview scene. |
|
|
|
Post by TylerDurden389 on Jan 15, 2012 11:36:26 GMT -5
I'd actually cut out the whole earthquake sequence too. In fact, I think STM can do without pretty much everything after the interview scene. Well then you'd have to go back and cut out every Lex scene before the interview as well, since every scene with him has him talking about his plan. Which again, is what the "Son of Jor-el" fan edit does. So go download it. |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jan 15, 2012 12:16:40 GMT -5
I'd actually cut out the whole earthquake sequence too. In fact, I think STM can do without pretty much everything after the interview scene. Well then you'd have to go back and cut out every Lex scene before the interview as well, since every scene with him has him talking about his plan. Which again, is what the "Son of Jor-el" fan edit does. So go download it. I actually wish there was a way to delete Lex from both STM and S2 completely. He adds nothing to the overall story arc at all. |
|
Gandy
New Member
Admiral
Owner & Creator of Superman Cinema
Posts: 17,343
|
Post by Gandy on Jan 15, 2012 13:14:22 GMT -5
So why do you watch these movies? ;D You don't say anything positive about them.
Lex is the opposite of Superman -- he's vital to the story and is a good Superman villain. Mind over muscle - this motif plays in both films.
|
|
ye5man
New Member
1%
Posts: 7,928
|
Post by ye5man on Jan 15, 2012 13:36:18 GMT -5
Simples
Interview sequence.
Cut to Lex lowering Miss T in the pit; feeding "babies". He's a sick bastard, he doesn't need a reason. Supes lifts her out. Cut the "your mother sends her love" line
Cut to prison yard. Luthor was a wanted man anyway.
The film would suck though ;D
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jan 15, 2012 18:17:44 GMT -5
So why do you watch these movies? ;D You don't say anything positive about them. Lex is the opposite of Superman -- he's vital to the story and is a good Superman villain. Mind over muscle - this motif plays in both films. The first 2/3 of STM is perfect. The Krypton stuff, Smallville stuff is amazing. The Metropolis part (excluding Lex and Otis rubbish) is brilliant up to the interview scene. From there, it degenerates to crap. There is a story arc that is made up of STM and S2, and Lex is not important to it at all. It would be much better to let Superman get established on earth and then face the villains from Krypton. Simple and to the point. I would prefer it is we cut straight from the interview scene in STM to the opening of Lester's S2 and the Paris stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Jan 15, 2012 22:12:43 GMT -5
That sounds like a fun project.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jan 16, 2012 5:09:21 GMT -5
Who did a worse job?
a) Donner in completing STM?
b) Lester in completing S2?
|
|
Gandy
New Member
Admiral
Owner & Creator of Superman Cinema
Posts: 17,343
|
Post by Gandy on Jan 16, 2012 7:25:55 GMT -5
So why do you watch these movies? ;D You don't say anything positive about them. Lex is the opposite of Superman -- he's vital to the story and is a good Superman villain. Mind over muscle - this motif plays in both films. The first 2/3 of STM is perfect. The Krypton stuff, Smallville stuff is amazing. The Metropolis part (excluding Lex and Otis rubbish) is brilliant up to the interview scene. From there, it degenerates to crap. There is a story arc that is made up of STM and S2, and Lex is not important to it at all. It would be much better to let Superman get established on earth and then face the villains from Krypton. Simple and to the point. I would prefer it is we cut straight from the interview scene in STM to the opening of Lester's S2 and the Paris stuff. It won't work without altering the whole film from scratch. Without Lex in STM, he doesn't work in S2 with the villains. It'd be pretty shit to see that version. The first film is only about establishing Superman. The Krypton villains would be overkill for that one film. I assume you switch off after the interview scene? |
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jan 16, 2012 8:22:17 GMT -5
The first 2/3 of STM is perfect. The Krypton stuff, Smallville stuff is amazing. The Metropolis part (excluding Lex and Otis rubbish) is brilliant up to the interview scene. From there, it degenerates to crap. There is a story arc that is made up of STM and S2, and Lex is not important to it at all. It would be much better to let Superman get established on earth and then face the villains from Krypton. Simple and to the point. I would prefer it is we cut straight from the interview scene in STM to the opening of Lester's S2 and the Paris stuff. It won't work without altering the whole film from scratch. Without Lex in STM, he doesn't work in S2 with the villains. It'd be pretty shit to see that version. The first film is only about establishing Superman. The Krypton villains would be overkill for that one film. I assume you switch off after the interview scene? Yes, I tend to switch off after the interview and flying with Lois scene. From that point on, the movie slowly starts to degenerate. By the time the film ends, it's been ruined with all the turning-the-world-back nonsense. I wish there were a way to remove Lex from S2 completely. STM post-interview is like The Living Daylights from Afghanistan onwards. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 16, 2012 12:41:35 GMT -5
I have a fan edit that completely eliminates the Sandman from the story. Sure it makes the film much shorter (about 95 minutes long with credits), but the narrative is much more focused on the central characters, and thus much better. It's called "The No Sandman Edition" (there's quite a few Spider-man 3 fan edits out there). The sequence of scenes are moved around a bit to fix any plot holes, and with the exception of Spider-Man suddenly being covered in sand with a damaged suit at the end, there are no plot holes whatsoever. obviously it's my "official version" now, and always offer to show it to friends if the subject of Spider-man 3 ever comes up. Spider-man 3 is just an unsatisfying film on almost every level save for the Sandman effects. Venom and Gwen had no meaningful impact, the Peter/MJ relationship felt hollow at the end, and Harry's death/sacrifice didn't have NEARLY the power it should have. The foundation of Peters ideals, what he learned from Uncle Bens death, is screwed around with to give Sandman some complexity, ties to Peter, and a sympathetic story arc that weren't even needed. At its core the story SHOULD have been about Harry and his relationship with Peter. Its the thread that runs through all three films. They're both the product of their "fathers" ideals even after their fathers are dead. Venom OR Sandman could stand to be cut. There are pluses for cutting either one. I'd probably cut both Sandman and Venom down and leave Venom as a cliffhanger for a sequel that will never be since The Venom character doesn't have enough depth to be a great antagonist. The last shot of the film could be Brock being covered with the symbiote at the cathedral and the camera zooming in on Venom. Spidey 3's plot and script problems aside, the other two have aged very poorly compared to others around that time period like X-Men/X2. It really clashes with the more 'serious' flicks like X-Men, Batman and Superman that came in the decade. Spider-man should be lighter than all of them in certain respects but there IS level of cheese there in the background that i never really cared for. The extras/bit parts are a good example. Their acting seems a bit odd in some way. Really broad and cartoonish. I definitely feel that the first two X-men films as a pair trump the Spider-man films. Most of X-men's problems are in the last third of the film. Before that its damn good. Spider-man has some issues running throughout but its still a good movie. MJ was always a flaw in these movies that only got worse as time went on. I'm getting to a point where I even think X-men 3 is better than Spider-man 3. The story about how it got to be a giant mess is a perfect storm (sorta/kinda), and some of it even is detailed (though they don't call it a mess, it's still easy to read between the lines & see the result on how things developed) in the pr. "Making of Spiderman 3" book. In broad strokes: #1: A too-rushed release date, and having to commit to certain fx sequences before the whole script was even formed yet. #2: Venom forced down Raimi's throat. The second villain was supposed to be the Vulture (played by Ben Kingsley). The vulture I can't see taking nearly as much story/screentime as Venom, had they kept to Raimi's idea. #3: Spiderman #3's script was so long, it was supposed to be TWO movies. Instead, it got crammed into one. #4: Mary Jane Watson was supposed to leave in the middle of the movie--- so it was supposed to be Gwen Stacey at the end, but when Bryce Howard turned out to be pregnant, they rewrote it and what resulted in MJ in what felt like repetitive "MJ's in trouble again" scenes from the first two films, whereas it was supposed to be Stacey (Makes more sense why Venom would kidnap Stacey over MJ, too). Factoring all those in..... no wonder it's a mess, especially racing against the clock with a half-finished script. ;p If Spiderman 4 had been left to ONLY Raimi, even Raimi talks about disappointment to now about he Spiderman film he wants/wanted to make, but hadn't hit the mark (in his opinion)- I thought the first & even more the second was great. Even if it's a similar plot, the character situations themselves I thought varied it enough from SII. All that makes perfect sense in retrospect. Knowing the period of Spider-man that Raimi grew up reading I can see Gwen over MJ. MJ always seemed more needy and self centered while Gwen was sweeter. The movie MJ magnified that by a factor of ten to a point that she came off as really selfish and unlikable. Margot Kidder and the Superman team got right with Lois what they were trying to do with MJ. An idealistic hero attracted to this complex independent minded "real" but flawed woman. Lois had a kind of charm that MJ never had. Spider-man 3 felt like a film where Peter and Mary Jane were naturally being driven apart. Even the end of Spider-man 2 had that last shot where MJ seemed a little uncertain of the choice she made and their future. Spider-man 3 seems like it could have been split into two films or that Venom was simply being set up for part 4. There is a story arc that is made up of STM and S2, and Lex is not important to it at all. It would be much better to let Superman get established on earth and then face the villains from Krypton. Simple and to the point. I would prefer it is we cut straight from the interview scene in STM to the opening of Lester's S2 and the Paris stuff. Thats actually not a bad idea for a fan cut. Its got me curious. You're right that there is an element to the background story of STM and SII where Lex isn't the driving force of the story. You'd have to restructure some things but it might work. |
|
|
|
Post by Jimbo on Jan 16, 2012 13:18:30 GMT -5
I'm getting to a point where I even think X-men 3 is better than Spider-man 3. I feel the same way. Out of all comic book movie 'Part 3's, X-Men The Last Stand is the best one....but only by default. It's the least horrible one. TDKR - "A NEW CHALLENGER APPEARS!" |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 16, 2012 13:33:40 GMT -5
I'm getting to a point where I even think X-men 3 is better than Spider-man 3. I feel the same way. Out of all comic book movie 'Part 3's, X-Men The Last Stand is the best one....but only by default. It's the least horrible one. TDKR - "A NEW CHALLENGER APPEARS!" Exactly. Its like saying which pile of horsesh** smells the best. The Last Stand kept a good cast of actors and brought in Kelsey Grammer as beast...which is as close to perfect casting as you're ever going to get in these movies. The cure = turning back time and The Last Stand was the last film in the same "kind of/sort of/maybe/we reserved the right to make more to get more money" kind of way that Star Trek Nemesis was the final film.  True they fumbled the ball like tards with The Phoenix and the story is piss poor but there's some good action. Spider-man 3 has fewer redeeming qualities. They gave Sandman some sappy hamfisted backstory as his excuse and Venom was just FUBAR from the word go. He's not a deep character anyway. Terrible MJ bullcrap, not enough Harry, and simply crammed with too much. The film gets worse and worse to me as time goes by. The Dark Knight Rises will win he race for best third comic book movie race easily. The past contenders range from weak to atrocious. The only way Nolan could make a film worse than Spider-man 3 or The Last Stand is if he lets some studio exec skullf*** his brains into oatmeal. |
|
|
|
Post by TylerDurden389 on Jan 16, 2012 15:30:17 GMT -5
Metallo, I COMPLETELY and WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with you on how 3 should've been ONLY about Peter and Harry. As well as how that's what the first 2 films built up to. I have been saying that to people for years now. You have no idea how mad I was when I saw part 3 the first time and saw Harry suffer amnesia after the first 10 minutes. The end of part 2 completely set him up to be the villain. For them to go and essentially ret-con that for nearly half of the film REALLY pissed me off.
Oh, and I had been talking about a cliffhanger with Venom as well lol. Though my idea for that would've been:
Part 3 shows Spidey get the symbiote. He becomes evil and thus turns away from it. Then Eddie gets the symbiote to become Venom (his character is set up over the first half of the film while Peter has the symbiote). 2nd half of film is Peter and Eddie fighting. It would've been the same sort of mind-games stuff similar to what Harry was doing to Peter in the actual part 3 film. The film ends with Spider-man separating Eddie from the symbiote, with them both thinking the symbiote has been killed. Eddie is put in a maximum security prison, with the last shot showing us his room-mate the guy who will become Carnage (Kletus? I can't remember his name). A post-credits scene would show the symbiote in a small state slowly and weakly coming back to life.
Part 4 has Spidey fighting another villain (doesn't matter who) for the first half of the film. After Spidey defeats said villain, the symbiote (now rejuvenated) find Eddie because they have their mind/bond connection (we'd have subsequent scenes throughout the film for the first half that shows Eddie in prison with Kletus, in order to give those 2 characters the character development they need. We need to see that Eddie isn't really a bad guy, and that Kletus IS). Symbiote re-joins Eddie, they bust out. A small spawn of the symbiote reproduces and crawls away. We wouldn't see it form a bond with Kletus though, it's only implied.
Venom now immediately goes after Peter. They fight again, on an island this time (as it happened in the comics), Peter manipulates Eddie into believing he's dead (skeleton covered in Spidey costume, again like the comics). Peter returns to NY...only to find Carnage now going on a rampage. After unsuccessfully being able to defeat Carnage alone, Peter finds Eddie to show him he's still alive...and needs his help. Eddie, understanding how much of a maniac Kletus is and how he must be stopped, sets aside his anger towards Peter for the greater good. They band together to finish off Carnage, possibly by using a sonic gun Dr. Connors invented for Spider-Man that he had originally been working on for Spidey in part 3 in order to use it on Venom. Story ends with the 2 of them reaching a mutual agreement to stay away from each other. Eddie leaves town and the last shot of him (possibly as another after-credits scene) would set us up for a Venom spin-off film.
Whatcha think?
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 16, 2012 17:39:47 GMT -5
Not bad. I like how you worked around Sandman. I think you show how the movie could have worked just fine without him. Your Eddie Brock is an actual three dimensional character instead of the one dimensional douche Topher Grace played. Its a terrible character. I don't have any interest in him at all so why should I see him as a threat? I prefer Sandman to Venom but the execution was terrible with both from a storytelling perspective. They halfassed the black costume story the same way Last Stand half assed the Phoenix saga. If they were going to use the symbiote there was simply no need for Sandman. Harry could have been the one against Peter instead of Sandman.
How would harry Osborn fit into your Spider-man 3 and 4?
We wasted five f***ing years on these movies waiting for the Peter/Harry issue to be resolved and they put it on the back seat instead of front and center. The movie is trash. The reasoning of the team behind the scenes really makes no sense.
It reminds me of what the Batman films degenerated into. Shoehorning in as many villains as possible in some cheese fest. Who cares if the team up makes sense?
Just because they turned Ock into this tragic villain there was no need to give us some surgery garbage with Sandman. They didn't try to make Norman overly sympathetic.
Arad was the guy who wanted Venom so bad. Its funny sine that they were so hard up for Venom but they poisoned the waters for any potential spinoff. ;D The same thing happened with Deadpool after Wolverine.
|
|
|
|
Post by TylerDurden389 on Jan 16, 2012 18:13:22 GMT -5
How would harry Osborn fit into your Spider-man 3 and 4? Well, this 2 parter idea for Venom and Carnage was an idea I made during 2002-2004 before Spidey 2 came out yet. I wasn't really sure yet where they were gonna take Harry's story. So this idea of mine was more fanboy stuff than anything. At the time I had endless arguments with a fried of mine because he wanted the sinister 6 ::shudder:: Realistically, the idea of Harry being the ONLY villain for 3 is what I wanted, and the direction I figured they were going. Especially after more or less re-hashing the same "theme" for the villain with Doc Ock in part 2. Villain is a normal guy, becomes like a surrogate father for Peter (in part 2's case, for only a short time), villain becomes evil, goes back and forth accepting and rejecting his evil nature, and villain and hero unmask each other. So to me it seemed obvious to go with Harry since now we don't need to set up character development for the villain early in the film since we've been getting his motivations since the end of the 1st film. Would've made Harry's death a heck of a lot more meaningful in the end wouldn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 16, 2012 21:05:06 GMT -5
Even with having (as originally planned) Sandman and the Vulture as the villains, eliminates some of the more problematic parts that forcing Venom into the picture caused--- but even had they kept that, and made it two pictures..... It might have worked, but I would LOVE for someone to leak that script that Raimi originally wanted. (Why don't they? It's a dead horse anyways...)
|
|
|
|
Post by snoopkryptodog on Jan 16, 2012 21:10:36 GMT -5
Getting back to the idea of the Lex-less SII, I actually think the film gains a fair bit without him in it. He's goofy -- mind over muscle could work as concept except that Lex surrounds himself with idiots, makes unfunny jokes and struts around in tacky suits. He trusts Otis with the changing the XK101 codes knowing that Otis is a fool -- my ideal Lex Luthor would just use a suped up remote control to take over the missile. He also unveils his plans to Superman instead of just killing him (why not load a machine gun with kryptonite bullets?). Moreover, he basically does nothing in the second movie but tell the villains about Supes being the son of Jor-El. Not exactly the most intimidating of villains, and hardly a "mind" worthy of killing Superman.
Cutting him out is tricky. How would the villains know the way to get to Superman is through Lois (maybe Zod could demand that someone provide intelligence reports on Superman, which could ID Lois as the foremost authority on Superman)?
How would the fortress battle be reedited? Is there a way for Supes to be waiting in the chamber when the villains arrive and zap them, without using Luthor as a foil? Could Supes rebuild the phantom zone and trap the villains in it while they're in Metropolis? Whatever the solution, major rotoscoping might be necessary.
If SI and SII are combined, Luthor needs to go to help with pacing and tone, and to control the run time, but unfortunately, the SII finale would need major reworking as a result.
|
|
|
|
Post by TylerDurden389 on Jan 17, 2012 11:10:56 GMT -5
Snoop, look up "Son of Jor-el" Superman fan edit on fanedit.org.
|
|
atp
New Member
Resident Troll
Posts: 6,823
|
Post by atp on Jan 17, 2012 13:45:36 GMT -5
The problem with that "Son of Jor el" edit is that Lex is still in it, and his sudden appearance towards the end seems awkward.
I wish he could be removed entirely from all the footage.
He doesn't need to be the one who tells Zod about who Superman is. Zod could see a newspaper article or TV report about the missing Superman, and put two and two together when he sees that Kryptonian S shield.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jan 17, 2012 14:40:25 GMT -5
Technically, it is possible--- but it's hard to imagine without him there.
Definitely, there would be a lot of holes in the film that would be hard to smooth over even if you erased him from the frames.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jan 17, 2012 15:12:15 GMT -5
You could probably cut Lex out and the movie could get away with how Zod learns about Superman being the son of Jor-El. People are constantly mentioning him before Zod ever meets him.
Once Zod does meet Superman and sees the symbol on Superman's chest I figure he could put two and two together.
But other problems creep up...like how the heck Zod and co find the Fortress of Solitude. As far as I can tell there's no way they could find it on their own unless they scoured the parts of the planet like Krypton. The arctic and Antarctica are HUGE areas for them to search...even with their powers.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoopkryptodog on Jan 19, 2012 8:40:23 GMT -5
I can't remember where I saw this idea, but I recall someone mentioning one possible solution for a lexless SI/II. Have Gene Hackman show up at the White House, editing out all goofiness like Ursa squeezing his hand. But he's no longer Lex Luthor, rather a government agent. His dialogue would be redubbed so that's it's not in English. Something like:
Government Agent (in Russian): I'm the man you sent for.
Zod (in Russian): The expert on this Superman?
Government Agent (in Russian): You're mastering Earth's languages quite quickly.
Zod: Our minds are as powerful as our bodies. Your crude tongues are easily acquired. Enough banter -- what do you know?
Government Agent: My department has been monitoring him since his appearance on Earth, using the most advanced of technology.
From here on, the agent supplies info to Zod, always cutting out references to Luthor, stupid jokes or demanding land in Australia. When it comes time to get the villains to the Fortress, he mentions his agency been tracking alpha waves to a location in the north ("We haven't yet acquired the military resources necessary to risk an investigation, but each of you is more powerful than any army any human could muster.") He feeds the coordinates to Zod. When it comes time to activate the depowering machine, Zod (his dialogue redubbed in whatever language they're speaking) says "crystals activate Kryptonian technology" (a fact he would know, being from Krypton) and demands that the agent activate the machine, again deleting all references to Australia.
Again, I wish I could give credit to whoever actually thought this idea up. I'm not sure I'm fully embracing the idea either. That said, it's the only solution I've seen that doesn't involve major rotoscoping that gets rid of as much as Luthor as possible. Hopefully a fan cutter figures something out. I'm really curious to a see a 100% Lexless cut of SI/II.
|
|
