Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 22, 2018 11:51:10 GMT -5
Superman V with Christopher Reeve
Superman Returns 2 with Brandon Routh
Batman 3 with Michael Keaton directed by Tim Burton
Batman 5 directed by Joel Schumacher
Spider-Man 4 with Tobey Maguire directed by Sam Raimi
The Amazing Spider-Man 3 with Andrew Garfield
X-men 3 directed by Bryan Singer
Punisher 2 with Thomas Jane
Hulk 2 directed by Ang Lee
HeIIboy 3 directed by Gullermo Del Toro
Blade 4/Alternate Blade 3 with Wesley Snipes
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 22, 2018 20:17:13 GMT -5
Superman V with Christopher Reeve Superman Returns 2 with Brandon Routh Batman 3 with Michael Keaton directed by Tim Burton Batman 5 directed by Joel Schumacher Spider-Man 4 with Tobey Maguire directed by Sam Raimi The Amazing Spider-Man 3 with Andrew Garfield X-men 3 directed by Bryan Singer Punisher 2 with Thomas Jane Hulk 2 directed by Ang Lee HeIIboy 3 directed by Gullermo Del Toro Blade 4/Alternate Blade 3 with Wesley Snipes Great list! My own: #1: (of course) Superman II fully by Donner #2: X-men 3 by Singer #3: Superman Returns by Singer #4: Spiderman 4 by Raimi #5: Superman V with Reeve My own reasoning behind these- #1 (Won't go into it, we all know) #2: Xmen 1 and 2 were going SO good, that X3 really made it all go south really quickly and unnecessarily. #3: Superman Returns 2 of course, because I felt SR really was one of the best setups.... though it should have had the second part of course. #4: Spiderman 3 was so sour, that even Raimi wanted to redeem himself on a high note. #5: Superman V with Reeve is last on my list- because SIV sadly showed me how the other actors really did age to a point that I felt a lot didn't work. A BvS might have worked better I think. A couple of others, but not superhero ones are what I would have wished got made: #1: Dune Messiah by David Lynch (back in the day) #2: John Carter 2 #3: Flash Gordon 2 (for fun, why not?) |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 22, 2018 20:46:00 GMT -5
Out of the ones I listed if I had to pick one HeIIboy 3 is the one that is the biggest missed opportunity. That story needed to be told. The others not so much. Sure some deserved redemption but with most i never felt like the end of a story was missing like with HeIIboy.
I think Singers X-men 3 had the best chance at being a really quality film though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2018 21:08:46 GMT -5
That insane Supergirl/Superman movie Illya Salkind dreamt up that could have featured Braniac and Mxyzptlk with random jousting scenes thrown in.
Zack Snyder's Justice League parts one and two.
Richard Donner's Superman II.
Nolan's Dark Knight sequel had Ledger not died
Not a sequel but I wish I could see it:
The Bill Murray Batman film that was never made that was to feature Eddie Murphy as Robin.
Tim Burton's Superman Lives
That Jack Black Green Lantern film that was supposed to end with Jack Black using the Green Lantern ring to manifest an illusion of Superman and make Superman save the day.
|
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Jun 23, 2018 0:09:06 GMT -5
Superman Returns 2 with Brandon Routh Why would you want to watch a legal drama about Lois suing Clark for back child-support? That would essentially be the plot of Superman Returns 2 |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 23, 2018 9:04:49 GMT -5
Superman V with Christopher Reeve Superman Returns 2 with Brandon Routh Batman 3 with Michael Keaton directed by Tim Burton Batman 5 directed by Joel Schumacher Spider-Man 4 with Tobey Maguire directed by Sam Raimi The Amazing Spider-Man 3 with Andrew Garfield X-men 3 directed by Bryan Singer Punisher 2 with Thomas Jane Hulk 2 directed by Ang Lee HeIIboy 3 directed by Gullermo Del Toro Blade 4/Alternate Blade 3 with Wesley Snipes Great list! My own: #1: (of course) Superman II fully by Donner #2: X-men 3 by Singer #3: Superman Returns by Singer #4: Spiderman 4 by Raimi #5: Superman V with Reeve My own reasoning behind these- #1 (Won't go into it, we all know) #2: Xmen 1 and 2 were going SO good, that X3 really made it all go south really quickly and unnecessarily. #3: Superman Returns 2 of course, because I felt SR really was one of the best setups.... though it should have had the second part of course. #4: Spiderman 3 was so sour, that even Raimi wanted to redeem himself on a high note. #5: Superman V with Reeve is last on my list- because SIV sadly showed me how the other actors really did age to a point that I felt a lot didn't work. A BvS might have worked better I think. A couple of others, but not superhero ones are what I would have wished got made: #1: Dune Messiah by David Lynch (back in the day) #2: John Carter 2 #3: Flash Gordon 2 (for fun, why not?) I need to add that I didn’t want all the ones I listed I was just throwing out some options. I’d add Supergirl with Christopher Reeve going by your criteria. Wonder how it would have turned out? |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 23, 2018 9:11:27 GMT -5
That insane Supergirl/Superman movie Illya Salkind dreamt up that could have featured Braniac and Mxyzptlk with random jousting scenes thrown in. I’m guessing you’d want this one just to see how crazy awful it would have turned out. Gotta admit there is something appealing about something like that. Like I’d want to see Sony’s Aunt May movie just to see how bad it could have gotten. I’d take Superman III with Tony Danza for similar reasons. Imagine that train wreck. Not really a sequel but thank god it never got made. That and the Eddie Murphy Green Lantern movie. Both would have been better than the 2011 movie though. Going by your guide I’ll say Superman and the Secret Planet starring George Reeves. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2018 9:49:10 GMT -5
That insane Supergirl/Superman movie Illya Salkind dreamt up that could have featured Braniac and Mxyzptlk with random jousting scenes thrown in. I’m guessing you’d want this one just to see how crazy awful it would have turned out. Gotta admit there is something appealing about something like that. Like I’d want to see Sony’s Aunt May movie just to see how bad it could have gotten. I’d take Superman III with Tony Danza for similar reasons. Imagine that train wreck. Not really a sequel but thank god it never got made. That and the Eddie Murphy Green Lantern movie. Both would have been better than the 2011 movie though. Going by your guide I’ll say Superman and the Secret Planet starring George Reeves. Yeah, I'm not suggesting most of these would be good, though would enjoy for the "What were they thinking!?" aspect alone. I do think I'd enjoy Snyder's Justice League films though  |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 23, 2018 10:25:09 GMT -5
I hear you. I don’t think I got that across in my original post. I think most of the films I listed would have been garbage but was curious to know if there was any desire for them. I’d watch an amazing Spider-Man 3 OT of curiousity but Sony was lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 23, 2018 13:50:03 GMT -5
I hear you. I don’t think I got that across in my original post. I think most of the films I listed would have been garbage but was curious to know if there was any desire for them. I’d watch an amazing Spider-Man 3 OT of curiousity but Sony was lost. The surprising thing about Sam Ramie's Spiderman 3 is that he got the green light to recut the movie (presumably) for dvd- and passed on it, even though he acknowledges it was compromised. I would have been curious to see the potential train wrecks mentioned here, though..... |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 23, 2018 16:05:11 GMT -5
He probably knows the movie is messed up from the ground up. What would be the point? It’s not like DOFP or even The Wolverine where there was originally a better movie that the studio mandated he cut down.
Spider-Man 3 is conceptually flawed with everything from Sandman killing Uncle Ben, Emo Peter, the mishandled Harry Osborn subplot, the awful version of Eddie Brock/Venom (that Raimi didn’t seem keen on using at all), and The slapped together Gwen Stacy romance. I think Raimi as a huge fan of those early comics has to know they could have handled the use of Gwen better. Even Webb’s movies did it better.
I think Spider-Man 3 could be improved with a re-edit for sure but I don’t think it could ever be made good. Plus it seems like Raimis heart wasn’t in it as much so I don’t see him putting the effort into something where he basically took the check and made the studios movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 24, 2018 0:14:56 GMT -5
He probably knows the movie is messed up from the ground up. What would be the point? It’s not like DOFP or even The Wolverine where there was originally a better movie that the studio mandated he cut down. Spider-Man 3 is conceptually flawed with everything from Sandman killing Uncle Ben, Emo Peter, the mishandled Harry Osborn subplot, the awful version of Eddie Brock/Venom (that Raimi didn’t seem keen on using at all), and The slapped together Gwen Stacy romance. I think Raimi as a huge fan of those early comics has to know they could have handled the use of Gwen better. Even Webb’s movies did it better. I think Spider-Man 3 could be improved with a re-edit for sure but I don’t think it could ever be made good. Plus it seems like Raimis heart wasn’t in it as much so I don’t see him putting the effort into something where he basically took the check and made the studios movie. Actually, surprisingly- the 'making of Spiderman 3' isn't a fluff piece, but (whether it knows it or not) put out a lot of reasons how and why the movie turned out as bad as it did. The script never was finished, but they needed enough lead time on some of the special effects to reach the release date- so some things were put out there without a full context. Venom was pressure by the studio to squeeze him in, and originally Mary Jane left the film in the middle and it was supposed to be Gwen Stacy at the end hanging from the webs. But- the script really is a bit of a mess- but I still prefer it greatly to the Sony Spidermans. Raimi does seem to have a giant love for the character, but I think he just got stuck and tried to do the best he could under the circumstances. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 24, 2018 15:42:18 GMT -5
He probably knows the movie is messed up from the ground up. What would be the point? It’s not like DOFP or even The Wolverine where there was originally a better movie that the studio mandated he cut down. Spider-Man 3 is conceptually flawed with everything from Sandman killing Uncle Ben, Emo Peter, the mishandled Harry Osborn subplot, the awful version of Eddie Brock/Venom (that Raimi didn’t seem keen on using at all), and The slapped together Gwen Stacy romance. I think Raimi as a huge fan of those early comics has to know they could have handled the use of Gwen better. Even Webb’s movies did it better. I think Spider-Man 3 could be improved with a re-edit for sure but I don’t think it could ever be made good. Plus it seems like Raimis heart wasn’t in it as much so I don’t see him putting the effort into something where he basically took the check and made the studios movie. Actually, surprisingly- the 'making of Spiderman 3' isn't a fluff piece, but (whether it knows it or not) put out a lot of reasons how and why the movie turned out as bad as it did. The script never was finished, but they needed enough lead time on some of the special effects to reach the release date- so some things were put out there without a full context. Venom was pressure by the studio to squeeze him in, and originally Mary Jane left the film in the middle and it was supposed to be Gwen Stacy at the end hanging from the webs. But- the script really is a bit of a mess- but I still prefer it greatly to the Sony Spidermans. Raimi does seem to have a giant love for the character, but I think he just got stuck and tried to do the best he could under the circumstances. You mean the Amazing Spider-Man films? Personally I think between those and Spider-Man 3 it’s a wash. The costume from the first Webb film is awful and the Spidey 3 suit trumps it (the black version was kind of lazy though) but the Amazing Spider-Man 2 costume might be the best live action Spidey suit ever. I think Garfield has always been a better Spidey but Maguire certainly started out the better Parker. Webb definitely handled Gwen and the romance with Peter better. The biggest thing Spider-Man 3 has on the two films that followed it is the tone. At least they mostly kept that right. Like you said though it’s just a mess. You could always tell Arad pushed hard for venom. He always said the fans wanted it. He’s one of the guys pushing for the venom solo film now. He’s the common denominator. I see why Raimi started with Mary Jane and put Gwen in later but it was always awkward and made me wish they’d started with Gwen or one of Peters other girlfriends first. There wasn’t enough time to develop Gwen in part of a movie and the idea of him leaving MJ right in the middle of the film or her leaving him just makes them both look like creeps. MJ already comes off bad enough in those films as insecure shallow selfish self centered and inconsiderate. I guess you’re right that they needed that extra year for the fx. They cranked out the far superior Spider-Man 2 in two years so you’d think they could pull off Spider-Man 3 in three years. 3 was by far the most complex and Fx heavy film though. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2018 21:29:06 GMT -5
Actually, surprisingly- the 'making of Spiderman 3' isn't a fluff piece, but (whether it knows it or not) put out a lot of reasons how and why the movie turned out as bad as it did. The script never was finished, but they needed enough lead time on some of the special effects to reach the release date- so some things were put out there without a full context. Venom was pressure by the studio to squeeze him in, and originally Mary Jane left the film in the middle and it was supposed to be Gwen Stacy at the end hanging from the webs. But- the script really is a bit of a mess- but I still prefer it greatly to the Sony Spidermans. Raimi does seem to have a giant love for the character, but I think he just got stuck and tried to do the best he could under the circumstances. You mean the Amazing Spider-Man films? Personally I think between those and Spider-Man 3 it’s a wash. The costume from the first Webb film is awful and the Spidey 3 suit trumps it (the black version was kind of lazy though) but the Amazing Spider-Man 2 costume might be the best live action Spidey suit ever. I think Garfield has always been a better Spidey but Maguire certainly started out the better Parker. Webb definitely handled Gwen and the romance with Peter better. The biggest thing Spider-Man 3 has on the two films that followed it is the tone. At least they mostly kept that right. Like you said though it’s just a mess. You could always tell Arad pushed hard for venom. He always said the fans wanted it. He’s one of the guys pushing for the venom solo film now. He’s the common denominator. I see why Raimi started with Mary Jane and put Gwen in later but it was always awkward and made me wish they’d started with Gwen or one of Peters other girlfriends first. There wasn’t enough time to develop Gwen in part of a movie and the idea of him leaving MJ right in the middle of the film or her leaving him just makes them both look like creeps. MJ already comes off bad enough in those films as insecure shallow selfish self centered and inconsiderate. I guess you’re right that they needed that extra year for the fx. They cranked out the far superior Spider-Man 2 in two years so you’d think they could pull off Spider-Man 3 in three years. 3 was by far the most complex and Fx heavy film though. It's amazing (in a sad way) how Raimi to Spiderman 1-3 is exactly how I felt about Nolan's Batman 1-3 films. First one was good, the second one spectacular, and the last one so bad overall that it confuses the heck out of a person. |
|
crown
New Member
Posts: 1,226
|
Post by crown on Jun 28, 2018 1:25:37 GMT -5
You mean the Amazing Spider-Man films? Personally I think between those and Spider-Man 3 it’s a wash. The costume from the first Webb film is awful and the Spidey 3 suit trumps it (the black version was kind of lazy though) but the Amazing Spider-Man 2 costume might be the best live action Spidey suit ever. I think Garfield has always been a better Spidey but Maguire certainly started out the better Parker. Webb definitely handled Gwen and the romance with Peter better. The biggest thing Spider-Man 3 has on the two films that followed it is the tone. At least they mostly kept that right. Like you said though it’s just a mess. You could always tell Arad pushed hard for venom. He always said the fans wanted it. He’s one of the guys pushing for the venom solo film now. He’s the common denominator. I see why Raimi started with Mary Jane and put Gwen in later but it was always awkward and made me wish they’d started with Gwen or one of Peters other girlfriends first. There wasn’t enough time to develop Gwen in part of a movie and the idea of him leaving MJ right in the middle of the film or her leaving him just makes them both look like creeps. MJ already comes off bad enough in those films as insecure shallow selfish self centered and inconsiderate. I guess you’re right that they needed that extra year for the fx. They cranked out the far superior Spider-Man 2 in two years so you’d think they could pull off Spider-Man 3 in three years. 3 was by far the most complex and Fx heavy film though. It's amazing (in a sad way) how Raimi to Spiderman 1-3 is exactly how I felt about Nolan's Batman 1-3 films. First one was good, the second one spectacular, and the last one so bad overall that it confuses the heck out of a person. It's also amazing how Spiderman 1-3 STOLE the plots from Superman 1-3. In 1 it's an origin story and the dad dies. In 2 the hero loses his powers and has to get them back. In 3 the hero turns evil. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 28, 2018 9:14:54 GMT -5
You mean the Amazing Spider-Man films? Personally I think between those and Spider-Man 3 it’s a wash. The costume from the first Webb film is awful and the Spidey 3 suit trumps it (the black version was kind of lazy though) but the Amazing Spider-Man 2 costume might be the best live action Spidey suit ever. I think Garfield has always been a better Spidey but Maguire certainly started out the better Parker. Webb definitely handled Gwen and the romance with Peter better. The biggest thing Spider-Man 3 has on the two films that followed it is the tone. At least they mostly kept that right. Like you said though it’s just a mess. You could always tell Arad pushed hard for venom. He always said the fans wanted it. He’s one of the guys pushing for the venom solo film now. He’s the common denominator. I see why Raimi started with Mary Jane and put Gwen in later but it was always awkward and made me wish they’d started with Gwen or one of Peters other girlfriends first. There wasn’t enough time to develop Gwen in part of a movie and the idea of him leaving MJ right in the middle of the film or her leaving him just makes them both look like creeps. MJ already comes off bad enough in those films as insecure shallow selfish self centered and inconsiderate. I guess you’re right that they needed that extra year for the fx. They cranked out the far superior Spider-Man 2 in two years so you’d think they could pull off Spider-Man 3 in three years. 3 was by far the most complex and Fx heavy film though. It's amazing (in a sad way) how Raimi to Spiderman 1-3 is exactly how I felt about Nolan's Batman 1-3 films. First one was good, the second one spectacular, and the last one so bad overall that it confuses the heck out of a person. It tends to be that way even though people usually say the sequel isn’t as good as the original. Look at the Alien films, The Godfather films, the Blade films, the Batman films, Star Wars trilogy, the X-men films, etc. Some people say the sequel is even better while it was the third film that dropped the ball or at least things went down. In some of those cases I think it’s true while in others the original is better. The first three Star Trek films buck that trend with the original being not that great the second one being fantastic and the third being solid. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 28, 2018 20:51:25 GMT -5
I look at it this way:
Superman/Spiderman I:
Hero seems by destiny and obligation
Superman II/Spiderman II:
Hero is freed of the obligation by fate: when he comes back to reclaim the responsibility, he does it fully on his own.
Superman III/Spiderman III:
Studio forces elements down filmmakers' throats, even if it doesn't really serve any real purpose to the story and bombs.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 28, 2018 20:56:51 GMT -5
And they make the hero into a darker version of themselves briefly.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 29, 2018 10:49:29 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2018 14:48:50 GMT -5
Yeah, I get that. It's just amusing how similar the first three Superman and Spider-Man films are. In 2, Parker briefly loses his powers just like Superman did in part two. Like they just lifted the basic template.
|
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 29, 2018 16:09:32 GMT -5
Well we’ve talked about that on here for years. I even laid out the similarities once myself in some old post. It’s right down to the shirt rip Maguire does that I’ve never really considered as a classic Spidey motif.  Even the casting. Dunst as MJ is in that Margot Kidder mold of the flawed object of affection. Casting Cliff Robertson as Ben was clearly inspired by casting Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (both actors come from the same era of Hollywood). Raimis never been particularly original with his content it’s his style that sets him apart. Raimi admitted then just like a lot of other directors that the Superman films were a huge influence. These films cannibalize each other all the time (watch Daredevil and note the points of similarity to The Crow and Burton’s Batman) The Spider-Man films just took it to another level. The first film (and its sequels) very much follows those films in terms of structure and content. But ask yourself this: how much of that started with the actual source material? You could argue that Lee and Ditko took a ton from Siegel and Shusters Superman to create Spider-Man. Peters a bespectacled nerd who works at a newspaper, has a loudmouth editor, loves a redhead and a brunette who don’t really know he even exists, raised by an elderly couple not his own parents, even has a suit with a red and blue color scheme. Spideys been taking stuff from Superman from the start. Then DC took from Marvel when they made Luthor like Osborne (among others), gave Supes a black suit, etc. I mean even away from superhero’s...when you watch Star Trek 2 notice how much was lifted from it for X-men 2. Hollywood’s gotten more and more blatant with that stuff over the last 30 years since the people who grew up as fans became filmmakers themselves. It’s nothing new but for some reason it’s become more obvious. In the past they tried to be more creative so that it wasn’t as blatant (look at how much Carpenter took from Howard Hawkes and Hitchcock for Halloween or from Sergio Leone for EFNY). It’s progressivly gotten worse as filmaking technology has gotten more advanced while each sucessive generation of writers and directors have become less inventive creatively. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jun 29, 2018 16:32:22 GMT -5
 The idea of Peter quitting in Spider-Man 2 was taken right from the comics but where’d the comics get it from?   That about sums it up for me. The order is right from the movies but the ideas have been rehashed long before that. |
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jul 2, 2018 18:46:49 GMT -5
Well we’ve talked about that on here for years. I even laid out the similarities once myself in some old post. It’s right down to the shirt rip Maguire does that I’ve never really considered as a classic Spidey motif. Even the casting. Dunst as MJ is in that Margot Kidder mold of the flawed object of affection. Casting Cliff Robertson as Ben was clearly inspired by casting Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (both actors come from the same era of Hollywood). Raimis never been particularly original with his content it’s his style that sets him apart. Raimi admitted then just like a lot of other directors that the Superman films were a huge influence. These films cannibalize each other all the time (watch Daredevil and note the points of similarity to The Crow and Burton’s Batman) The Spider-Man films just took it to another level. The first film (and its sequels) very much follows those films in terms of structure and content. But ask yourself this: how much of that started with the actual source material? You could argue that Lee and Ditko took a ton from Siegel and Shusters Superman to create Spider-Man. Peters a bespectacled nerd who works at a newspaper, has a loudmouth editor, loves a redhead and a brunette who don’t really know he even exists, raised by an elderly couple not his own parents, even has a suit with a red and blue color scheme. Spideys been taking stuff from Superman from the start. Then DC took from Marvel when they made Luthor like Osborne (among others), gave Supes a black suit, etc. I mean even away from superhero’s...when you watch Star Trek 2 notice how much was lifted from it for X-men 2. Hollywood’s gotten more and more blatant with that stuff over the last 30 years since the people who grew up as fans became filmmakers themselves. It’s nothing new but for some reason it’s become more obvious. In the past they tried to be more creative so that it wasn’t as blatant (look at how much Carpenter took from Howard Hawkes and Hitchcock for Halloween or from Sergio Leone for EFNY). It’s progressivly gotten worse as filmaking technology has gotten more advanced while each sucessive generation of writers and directors have become less inventive creatively. I think there are so many elements to make a story work- that I think two things: (1)Sometimes the 'steal' is unintentional- that patterns of a story that someone loved before very likely could be ripped off and implanted in another story, without even realizing it... (2)As long as the flow feels natural for the character- I'm totally fine with ripping off whatever, as long as it's great execution. Trek 2 and X2 I guess I could see similarities if I wanted to- but I enjoyed both, so I was fine with it. If the end result isn't that great- then I get more irritated. With superhero stories--- definitely Lee's Spiderman evolved from Lee trying to run in the other direction from what DC superheroes were at the time. If Superman and the DC heroes didn't happen, it's doubtful that Spiderman would have. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2018 19:27:05 GMT -5
The idea of Peter quitting in Spider-Man 2 was taken right from the comics but where’d the comics get it from? That about sums it up for me. The order is right from the movies but the ideas have been rehashed long before that. Both awesome covers, and for sure, definitely related. |
|
Metallo
New Member
The worlds finest heroes
Posts: 17,076
|
Post by Metallo on Jul 3, 2018 13:47:11 GMT -5
Well we’ve talked about that on here for years. I even laid out the similarities once myself in some old post. It’s right down to the shirt rip Maguire does that I’ve never really considered as a classic Spidey motif. Even the casting. Dunst as MJ is in that Margot Kidder mold of the flawed object of affection. Casting Cliff Robertson as Ben was clearly inspired by casting Glenn Ford as Jonathan Kent (both actors come from the same era of Hollywood). Raimis never been particularly original with his content it’s his style that sets him apart. Raimi admitted then just like a lot of other directors that the Superman films were a huge influence. These films cannibalize each other all the time (watch Daredevil and note the points of similarity to The Crow and Burton’s Batman) The Spider-Man films just took it to another level. The first film (and its sequels) very much follows those films in terms of structure and content. But ask yourself this: how much of that started with the actual source material? You could argue that Lee and Ditko took a ton from Siegel and Shusters Superman to create Spider-Man. Peters a bespectacled nerd who works at a newspaper, has a loudmouth editor, loves a redhead and a brunette who don’t really know he even exists, raised by an elderly couple not his own parents, even has a suit with a red and blue color scheme. Spideys been taking stuff from Superman from the start. Then DC took from Marvel when they made Luthor like Osborne (among others), gave Supes a black suit, etc. I mean even away from superhero’s...when you watch Star Trek 2 notice how much was lifted from it for X-men 2. Hollywood’s gotten more and more blatant with that stuff over the last 30 years since the people who grew up as fans became filmmakers themselves. It’s nothing new but for some reason it’s become more obvious. In the past they tried to be more creative so that it wasn’t as blatant (look at how much Carpenter took from Howard Hawkes and Hitchcock for Halloween or from Sergio Leone for EFNY). It’s progressivly gotten worse as filmaking technology has gotten more advanced while each sucessive generation of writers and directors have become less inventive creatively. I think there are so many elements to make a story work- that I think two things: (1)Sometimes the 'steal' is unintentional- that patterns of a story that someone loved before very likely could be ripped off and implanted in another story, without even realizing it... (2)As long as the flow feels natural for the character- I'm totally fine with ripping off whatever, as long as it's great execution. Trek 2 and X2 I guess I could see similarities if I wanted to- but I enjoyed both, so I was fine with it. If the end result isn't that great- then I get more irritated. With superhero stories--- definitely Lee's Spiderman evolved from Lee trying to run in the other direction from what DC superheroes were at the time. If Superman and the DC heroes didn't happen, it's doubtful that Spiderman would have. Most characters take something from others. It’s how it’s done that makes it work. Spider-Man stands on his own because of how those elements were mixed together and used in stories. Batman owes a lot to Zorro, The Shadow, and The Phantom but they took those same ideas and made them their own for Batman. |
|
