Cool News
SPIDER-MAN 2 just as good as THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK' This reviewer thinks so!!!
SPOILER ALERT !!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with an orgasmic Spidey 2 review... I must be honest... I read the opening paragraph and then skipped the rest. Before you think I'll just post anything sent my way, this source has given me solid info before... It's just that I over-saturated myself before I saw the first SPIDER-MAN and I think that had a little to do with me not loving the first film 110%. I caught the comparison to THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK near the end of the review as I was coding it for posting... DAMN! I want to see this movie this minute! Unfortunately for me, the local Sony reps don't seem to want to invite me to the week early press screening, so I'm in the same boat as most of you folks out there... destined to fight for that midnight Thursday showing ticket! See ya' in line, fools! Except for the below reviewer, who can rot in hell alongside Moriarty and Herc for seeing this movie before me!!!
Last summer pundits blamed a box office drought in
June on disappointing follow-ups. They term
sequelitis was paraded around. I take issue with this
label. Some of my favorite films have been sequels.
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF
KAHN, ALIENS, T2. Last summer, the sequel to the big
screen adaptation of Marvel's X-MEN became one of
those rare second films in a franchise to surpass the
first in terms of quality. Well, this year, the crown
jewel of the Marvel Universe... It's most iconic
character... SPIDER-MAN... Has a sequel coming out.
And by George, if this isn't the comic book movie
we've always dreamed about.
But while it improves upon the webslinger's first big
screen adventure in terms of how much the action
sequences deliver and how much cooler this film's
villain is, the story is a seamlessly smooth
transition from the last installment to this one.
Aside from the change in cinematographer and aspect
ratio, it's hard to believe that this film wasn't shot
simultaneously to the last one and then cut up in the
editing room (a la THE LORD OF THE RINGS). And that
may turn out to be a sad fact, considering how we have
to wait more than just a year for the next chapter in
Spidey's amazing story.
Now, I'm not going to go in to detail summarizing the
plot. Because if you don't know the story-line for
Spider-man 2 by now, you wouldn't be on this website
reading this review.
Instead I'm going to gush about what works. Having
seen two Spider-man films, I now analyze them by
breaking the movies down into the three elements that
I feel make these movies tick: story, romance, and
villain.
Let's start with what we've all been waiting to see
ever since a big budget live-action adaptation of this
character was put into development:
DOC OCK!
I'll admit that when they announced he would be the
lone villain in this film, I was weary. Spider-man
has always been more similar to Batman than Superman
in that he has a myriad of different villains he takes
on as opposed to an arch nemeis like Lex Luthor. But
one thing that I thought would be tricky in a Spidey
movie franchise is that so many of the popular
villains are scientists turned villains. Leaving not
much difference in their tragic Frankenstein-esque
origin stories (complete with character arcs featuring
redemption).
Luckily, Raimi didn't really make Norman Osbourne
tragic, so much as spoiled. And Willem Dafoe's
character certainly didn't redeem himself by movie's
end. A good decision, as it allows Octavious'
character traits to feel fresh. Also, if I had one
complaint about the first Spider-man film, it's that
Green Goblin fealt a little weak as a threatening
villain, and his costume was lackluster. If you
agreed, fear not, because Dock Ock's tentacles are a
force of mass destruction to be reckoned with; several
action sequences throughout the movie add up to the
best onscreen (superhero vs. supervillain) comic book
style fights we've ever seen. But the stakes don't
stop short with the protagonist duking it out with the
antagonist (and all the structural damage and innocent
bystanders in-between). While the goblin cold throw
some pumpkins into a crowd, Doc Ock's' "big bad" (for
all you "Buffy..." fans) plan at the end is a
potential threat to half the city of New York.
Meanwhile Molina's performance brings Octavious to
life. He immerses himself in the role and takes the
character from the four-color page to celluloid like
we've never seen before in a comic book movie.
THE STORY-LINE
What's always made Peter Parker a great character is
his angst. This film picks right up where the last
one left off after he branded himself as being cursed
and really makes you feel for the guy. Throughout the
movie, his relationships are tested with everyone;
Harry, MJ, even Aunt May...
The supporting cast of characters seem to be evolving
as well. Harry's obsession with avenging his father's
death (which he blames on Spider-Man) swells. And by
movie's end, the tension between Harry and Peter over
the webslinger will heat up to a plot point that will
make the wait for the next film almost as unbearable
as the 3 years following Vader's reveal to Luke that
he is his father.
Easter Eggs like the appearance of Dock Connors as
Peter's Professor may be a give away to fans, but
they're also an effective set-up for the futre
installments of this ongoing "story" that Sam Raimi is
telling. On that note, finally...
THE ROMANCE
I defended the changes made with regard to Peter being
able to manifest his own webbing, and not having to
create 3m corporation shooters. But merging Gwen
Stacy into Mary Jane annoyed me. The biggest action
sequence, which I usually believe should be the climax
of a film, came earlier in the first Spider-Man, at
the unity fair scene. The final showdown between the
goblin and Spider-man was a smaller, more intimate
affair, where Peter was forced to choose between the
woman he loves (the few or the one, for all you "Star
Trek" fans) and the needs of the many. But he didn't
make that choice. Somehow Spider-man history was
rewritten and he saved MJ and the people on the bus.
This was a defining moment in the history of the
Spider-man character, because it set the stage for him
pushing away the people he cares about, for being too
close to them could cause harm. The exclusion of this
plot point from the film has bothered me and a lot of
other die hard fans ever since. Well, tonight, when I
walked out of the theatre, it was no longer an issue.
When the teaser for this film appeared on screens last
Christmas, it featured MJ grilling Peter on whether or
not he loved her. The advertisements on the TV when
they debuted the new trailer during "The Apprentice"
proudly exclaimed that "the story continues June 30."
It certainly does. The love story, that is. Because
that's what Sam Raimi has created. An ongoing love
story set against the backdrop of the trials and
tribulations of a superhero.
Make no mistake, it's the character development and
love story that propelled the first film's gross
beyond Sony's hopes of 300 million to an out of this
world 400 million dollar gross domestically. This
time, I think Sony has what will become only the
second film to gross north of 500 million at the U.S
box office.
In the first film, Peter learned that with great
power, comes great responsibility. This film is all
about sacrifice and how it plays into love. He will
make one for Mary Jane. And she will do the same
thing for him. And that's what the last, beautiful,
frame of the movie is all about.
All in all, if the first Spider-man was STAR WARS...a
charming, playful, whimsical adventure...this film is
THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK...a darker, larger scale,
"super" hero's quest. But with Raimi at the helm, I
have no fears that the next movie will be a RETURN OF
THE JEDI.
-
+ Expand All
-
God I hope I'm not first now.
-
Anybody call for a web slinger?
-
Deos this mean that Spidey 4 will be a prequel with a crappy kid playing parker and who has a CG friend with an amazingly bad Jamacian accent?...And thus, plant! - - - George, The 7th Chicken!!!!
-
All movies pale in comparison to 'The Empire Strikes Back'!!!
-
Except someone is trying far too hard. It's like he didn't study and went off on this horrible ruanaway train of a tangent.
-
And besides, stop comparing all these new films to old classics. You haven't seen Spider Man 2 10+ times, but probably have seen Empire at least that much.
Once you have seen a film so many times, THEN you can compare it like for like.
Sheeshm every 6 months, we have another geek comparison to TESB, which just never holds up. ROTK wasn't comparable to ESB, but people did it nevertheless. (BTW: ROTK was better, but different)
-
Jun 14, 2004 6:06:41 AM CDT
He preferred the kiddy chewing gum of Camoron's (Pseudo)Aliens o
by salvatoregravano
...and I stopped reading right there.
-
So I could be part of what is the lamest talk-back of all time! "All movies pale in comparison to 'The Empire Strikes Back'" "the first one sucked " "Empire Strikes Back wasn't THAT good." "didn't it used to be called Superman 2?" And then condemnation, "That just about says it all... " "That is all I need to know about him" Dear God, do you have anything to say other than "First." Do your minds bubble with any more critical thoughts than "give me more Viggo!" This tired shit must mean all the interesting people went somewhere else. I'll go find them. Enjoy your ScFi circle jerk. Cheers
-
Even the ewoks weren't horrible. I loved 'em as a kid. But some idiots make it sound as if ROTJ sucked, when in fact it is better than just about any other movie out there.
-
Because ROTJ was the weakest of the three (just as was Godfather III, Terminator III and LOTR:ROTK), but I am balls-to-the-wall excited about a new Spidey movie. The first one thrilled me as it did something that NONE of the other superhero movies had done so far - an accurate and indepth origin story without overdoing the cheese factor - and it had an interesting character who didn't fall into the whole "I'M A FLAWED DARK PERSONALITY" genre stereotype. He's just a kid who has powers that are beyond the ordinary and most of us would use them to show off and make ourselves important - i.e. do good. Spidey set up what could very well be the best comic book franchise ever, if they follow up the Harry plot and keep Peter as true to himself then damn, you can throw your sequeltitis ridden Blades and X-Men in the trash.
-
Pretty big shoes to fill...let's hope it does on 6/30/04.
-
Jun 14, 2004 11:02:19 AM CDT
So Nintendo...all that racist shit you said about me was just se
by lost skeleton
And you got the nerve to represent Philly. You disgust me even more ...even if you are a Matrix fan.
Big pussy! -
Jun 14, 2004 11:35:58 AM CDT
"Make no mistake, it's the character development and love story
by iamjacksuserid
Uh...WUT??? Sorry, please try again. It was the action and the fact that it was a Spider-Man movie that propelled the film all the way. It had NOTHING to do with love story or character development. Hahahaha, geez. Oh yeah, and I feel the LOTR trilogy is the most overated, overblown, overhyped thing in the face of the earth now. I thought the first one was pretty good, the second one bored me to tears even in a theatre, and the third one bored me to tears and made me question my desire to live with it's 2 hour ending. I think LOTR lacks this spark of life, as if it's a hugely budgeted bad play where the cast inanely bellow awkward lines then look contemplatively ahead with constipated grimaces. I know I'll have the fuzzy feet brigade at my house very soon now for this, so I must go and prepare for battle. ---- And Harry, please don't fix or change this site because I love spending my entire mornings trying to post ONE DAMN THING on this slow ass site!!!
-
...ROTJ is some sort of high mark to strive for. You gotta be kidding me, right? Looking forward to this and the trailers I've seen do make Doc Oc appear to be a bad ass. Sheeit, I'm sure some of you would kick Kirsten out of the bed for eating graham crackers...yeah, right. As for LoTR, keep at it folks...I'm sure you'll get a few nibbles for your trolling efforts...just not from me. G'wan an' try {[:^)
-
Wow, Darth Vader is Luke's father....what a brilliant piece of writing. Lucas should be proud. The film was lame and ROTJ was even suckier. Hopefully Spidey 2 will not be shit like all the SW sequels were.
-
Jun 14, 2004 1:17:27 PM CDT
Superman 2, the best part, Darkman, & The Return of the Goblin..
by gislef_crow
Ummm, Peter Parker _doesn't_ lose his powers to get the girl. You'd think on a spoiler site, folks would be a little more informed about the spoiler stuff. :) The power-loss thing is a secondary issue - MJ is a contributing factor, but it ain't really tied to her as much as Peter's lousy life as Spiderman in general. And even after he loses his powers, he doesn't really "get" MJ - there's the whole wedding thing still in the way. The best part of the flick, unmentioned here, is Jameson, who's a real hoot with a lot more screentime and a bit more of a human side. "Who says you can't get a good $2 haircut?" One thing kind of irritating is the Dr. Octopus thing is rather reminscent of Darkman. Scientist loses his loved one in same experiment that disfigures him (but kinda gives him a superpower) and drives him nuts, he goes off into a warehouse somewhere and rebuilds his project, and picks up a cool leather coat in the process. ;) The only downside I see to #2 is that we've got the Green Goblin returning in #3. The psuedo-Green Power Ranger armored figure was bad enough the first time around - if I didn't buy Willem Dafoe, I don't see James Franco doing any better. Unfortunately, Spidey has even less first-tier bad guys then Batman (who still has Ra's al Ghul and Bane, if nothing else). Spidey's got better second-tier villains then Bats, but who wants to go to a feature-lengther about the Scorpion? the Vulture? Mysterio? Sandman? Maybe Venom and Kraven and it seems like Spidey's villain pool runs dry. I guess we'll see.
-
Jun 14, 2004 1:34:33 PM CDT
Fact is, all the orginal Star Wars trilogy was trite. It's why t
by pbj street gang
Look, Star Wars was and is great for all different reasons than you current haters tout. Fact is, it was always an homage to pulp films like Flash Gordon that were SUPPOSED to have a cheese factor. But you younger fans wrongly viewed Star Wars was 'advanced' sci-fi and completely genuine for some reason. The Empire Strikes Back was a great middle movie that is beloved because it was zippy in its pace, multi-storylined, darker and didn't resemble it's predicessor. But it was still a hackneyed B-movie along the lines of Attack of Clones with an excrutiatingly whiney lead actor, a fakey Yoda puppet, a monotonous gay robot and far too many Vader chokings. But like it's prequel counterpart it REALLY picks up in act three and makes us all 'feel' like we walked out of something great-ish. But Star Wars is still Star Wars. It exists on a bizarre, un-ironic but completely genuine critic-proof chart from yesteryear. THAT is the only genius that Lucas will be remembered for. And thank God he did the prequels to remind us of that.
-
Well I'm looking forward to it. Its the only comic book movie I've given a shit about really. The Hulk had its moments, and X-men has been a nice suprise but Spiderman is the one that matters as far as I'm concerned. it sounds like its gone exactly the way I'd want it to.
As for peoples other comments - although LOTR was a good trilogy the last installment had some BLATANT rip-offs from other movies.
Killing the elephonts - AT-AT walkers.
the Witch-king leader of the Nazgul - Darth Vader
Sam telling Shelob to 'get away' from Frodo - Aliens
Oh and Wrath of Khan was only a good movie when compared to other Star Trek movies. You cannot, as they say, polish a turd.
On the next installment, i'd like to see Venom as a bad guy, although he shouldn't be from space or 'another dimension' should be created in a lab or something... -
Jun 14, 2004 6:36:54 PM CDT
You're writing a 'peper' are you? Ha! I laugh at you, Sir. At le
by jimbolo
-
And is the only reason we're still talking about Star Wars.
-
Yes, the trailer does make it look like a complete, total ripoff of "Superman 2." But don't listen to me, I'm the only person on this planet that apparently thought the first "Spiderman" was crap.
-
Yes, the trailer does make it look like a complete, total ripoff of "Superman 2." But don't listen to me, I'm the only person on this planet that apparently thought the first "Spiderman" was crap.
-
Well luckily i dont have to wait. I won a contest from MTV so i will get to see the movie on the 22nd at the premiere. And as good as this guy says it is i am as pumped as ever. along with the fact that if the Batman Begins trailer is finished by then i will get to check that out as well
-
Its got to be better than the first one,the Green Goblin looked worse than those freaking saturday morning Power Ranger shows. Molina is the man and Im sure hell kick ass as Doc Ock
-
Blah! Is it me or am I just completely tired of reviews and talkbacks that just compare every film they see to Star Wars, Matrix, Lord Of The Rings, etc. It's no wonder these films get over hyped in your own minds because you compare them to other films that you've also put on these godly pedistals so by the time it's all over we get some sappy ass trite cliche review devoid of all reason to prove if it really in the end was just simply entertaining or not. Thats all I wanna know... not if you thought it was "..the Aliens", "..equivillant to Godfather II", or "..The Empire Strikes Back" bullshit. I've read this site since near the beginning... however this review is the very reason I just read the posts and not the talkbacks. Talkbacks, much like this review, have just degraded into a summer movie pissing contest where no mater what the main topic was about I'll always somehow some way see The Matrix sequels, LOTR, Star Wars, etc always brought up even if the main topic were proclaiming the death of Ron Jeremy. Look ya even made me now bring it up... XD
-
He'll write a review, tell his childhood story for the millionth time, compare this movie to to other sequels, then just say he kinda liked it.
-
> Actually, we're here BECAUSE the plot has never been leaked on any website, only the names of the characters and their relationships, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS "REVIEW" RE-HASHED. No mention of plot points, pacing, lines of dialog, action set pieces, use of NYC geography, music, cinematography or FX--but plenty of discussion about the first movie. I think this "review" is all wishful thinking and a desire to see his/her words published online. (Dang, I've become one sorry, cynical TalkBacker!) Nevertheless, I'm expecting SPIDEY 2 to be the best genre film this year.
-
I'm writing this on a Pepper as we speak, and I'm using this site as a reference! Or is it a paper?
-
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=494&ncid=763&e=3&u=/ap/20040614/ap_en_tv/tv_buried_secret
-
Jun 14, 2004 9:38:59 PM CDT
THE NEXT FILM WILL BE A RETURN OF THE JEDI ?? NO EWOKS PLEASE !
by el zar
Those midget chewbaccas should all be barbecued.
-
Anyone else fucking sitting around for 10 mins waiting for one article to load? I usually give up and goto cinescape or watch porn.
-
You're right morGoth, I wouldn't kick Dunst out of bed...or out of the shower, or off the coffee table, or down from the ceiling fan. Granted she's not as hot as she used to be (circa Drop Dead Gorgeous) but she still makes my spider senses tingle.
-
Jun 14, 2004 10:33:19 PM CDT
People who say "Empire" sucked have seriously lost touch with re
by tall_boy
not to mention they're jacking off on the covers of thier LOTR:TT EE DVDs too much. Buncha fuckin psychopaths, if you ask me.
-
I wouldn't kick her out of bed. It'd be way more fun to just grab the back of her head and smack her face into the bedpost once or twice. Just enough to dislodge that tooth.
-
People in this talkback always amaze me with how little taste they have. Spiderman cgi is some of the worst that has been seen in recent film. Talkbackers here who have no idea what good film is, think they are watching the best thing to come out of Holywood. Maybe if some of you fanboys would gwe your f&*$ing head out of your ass, you would see that the cgi in the spiderman film is on par with the old comicbook title Peter Porker and the Spectacular Spiderham....f*$%ing idiots!!!
-
Jun 15, 2004 12:54:43 AM CDT
This movie is gonna be frickin' amazing and you all know it...
by snow is fun
Quit making ridiculous claims about how one movie is ripping off another. Do you even realize how stupid you sound for saying that ROTK rips off movies like Aliens and Star Wars when it in fact was written many years before these movies? I don't care how similar Spider-man 2 seems to Superman 2, it's gonna be a kick-ass movie. And all the bitching about ROTJ and the prequels sucking is just utter crap. I'm only 19, so the way that I saw the original trilogy was one movie right after the other, so to me they basically feel like one really long, really great movie. The three parts just seem to naturally flow into each other to make a complete story. And the fact is that the prequels are damn fine movies. No, they aren't as good as the original trilogy, nothing is, but compared not to other Star Wars films but just to other films in general they are great movies. Same thing goes for the Matrix sequel. You can disagree with me all you want, but you'd be wrong to do so. Anyway, all you whiny haters need to lighten up and just enjoy good movies when they come out.
-
Sam Rammi imposed too much of the 60's spidey and left out too much exposition and plot holes. His cast for Parker and Harry should have been flipped (Tobey's an exceptional actor but under Rammi's supervision he came off as more irritating than Hayeden Christiansian under G. Lucas's direction). Furthermore, Kirsten Dunst was all wrong, even though she gave a valient effort.
Hopefully, the reviewers aren't overembellishing this flick. Honestly, I want this film to as superior to the original as X2, Godfather 2, Wrath of Kahn, Empire Strikes Back, The Color of Money, A.P. The Spy Who Shagged Me, and Rush Hour 2 were to their predicesors. -
PREACH!!!
-
Jun 15, 2004 12:58:47 AM CDT
"SPIDER-MAN 2 just as good as THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK? This revi
by voice o. reason
No he doesn't. Maybe you should actually read the review enxt time.
-
Jun 15, 2004 1:03:34 AM CDT
How can something be a rip-off of somehting it pre-dates?
by voice o. reason
SPIDER-MAN 2 is almost entirely based on comics written in the 1960s. SUPERMAN II came out in 1980. Please think before you post.
-
It's like in the films when people say somewthing like, "Hey, I think he went that way", then a few scenes later, some other character goes, "You said he went that way!!". Where indeed does this person say this is on par with The Empire Strikes Back? Tuhhh...
-
Everywhere I look they're calling the guy "Doc Ock". As if that somehow sounds less stupid than "Dr. Octopus".
-
Jun 15, 2004 1:49:03 AM CDT
"No he doesn't. Maybe you should actually read the review enxt t
by pip1345
Finally, someone says it.
-
The reviewer was only saying that Spider-Man 2 was The Empire Strikes Back of the Spider-Man series. Not better than The Empire Strikes Back, because that would be a completely ridiculous thing to say.
-
WELL HI KIDS , i'm glad we seeem to have our genres sorted at least , i'm not going to come on here saying how shite spidey looks compared to say mullholland drive which is normally more my sort of film but as an avid comic book fan every time one of these movies comes up i feel the need to see it ...and get dissapointed . I've heard alot of rave reviews for spidey 2 and then i see the trailers .. i'm not going to harp on about story cos i haven't seen it but i can judge those 'amazing!' action sequences - oh look it's peter parker! oh he's gonna change into spidey , wow cool he's swinging through the city OH NO fucking wait a minute thats a cartoon. Too many films at the moment are relying on ropey cgi to carry their action sequences , i mean even for cgi it looks bad the movement is terrible . It's not like they just slip it in for an amazing impossible sequence that can't possibly be filmed in reality it's like ahh he did a somersault
-
WELL HI KIDS , i'm glad we seeem to have our genres sorted at least , i'm not going to come on here saying how shite spidey looks compared to say mullholland drive which is normally more my sort of film but as an avid comic book fan every time one of these movies comes up i feel the need to see it ...and get dissapointed . I've heard alot of rave reviews for spidey 2 and then i see the trailers .. i'm not going to harp on about story cos i haven't seen it but i can judge those 'amazing!' action sequences - oh look it's peter parker! oh he's gonna change into spidey , wow cool he's swinging through the city OH NO fucking wait a minute thats a cartoon. Too many films at the moment are relying on ropey cgi to carry their action sequences , i mean even for cgi it looks bad the movement is terrible . It's not like they just slip it in for an amazing impossible sequence that can't possibly be filmed in reality it's like ahh he did a somersault CGI! , he kicks someone CGI!, he fucking picks his nose CG FUCKING I and everytime it happens the viewer feels that bit more detached . CGI is being used like a toy thats just been discovered by middle aged directors who didn't fulfill there wank fantasies as younger directors . I dare someone to say jabba looked good in those new editions of starwars or the cantina band . ok i'm not really talking about spidey now but just urging every superman aliens terminator whatever directors to reconsider their usage of CGI to create living things , spaceships and shit that doesn't have to move complexly by all means but leave the other shit to wirework or a good puppet ffs.
-
Dunst may have butterteeth. She may be melanin-deficient. She may not even be that good-looking. I'd wager a whole stack of beanpies that you'd fuck her if you had the chance, though. Keep working on mastering the subtleties of the "post" button in the meantime, though. You'll get the hang of it eventually.
-
Re MJ.
-
RE: nincompoops who continue to bash LOTR every chance the topic is about sequelitis. TTT ruled. ROTK ruled. For those who say ROTK ripped off this and that. My friends, a real ripoff movie is anything by ID4 Emerrich. Elephants are AT-AT walkers? Try the BOOK itself in 1957 when it clearly describes the humongous elephants. Witch-King of Angmar? Try the book and the Silmarillion(posth 1976, written since WWI) which clearly states how the black riders and the nine looked and the Witch King's history 2000 years before LOTR. Here's some Lucas facts: He was "inspired" by the dark costumes in "Things To Come". In 1975 Lucas, (NINETEEN SEVENTY FIVE A.D. TWENTY YEARS BEFORE JACKSON STARTED ON LOTR in 1995),when he was writing the script to the first starwars he with Gary Kurtz research the >>>BOOK<<< LORD OF THE RINGS because he wanted to make a "SPACE FANTASY". Lucas was "inspired"=RIPOFFED many many ideas from the LOTR BOOKS. No wonder Luke's home looks like a HOBBIT MOUND DUHHH! Clean up the mess of your burst bubbles Lucas eggheads.
-
Jun 15, 2004 4:47:47 AM CDT
For the last time, X2 was not as grand a sequel as everyone make
by theginger twit
-
Can't wait for this movie. Saying it's as good as ESB is just icing on the cake...but then ESB wasen't the greatest movie ever. Why does ROTJ get so much shit? I love ROTJ as much as the others (yeah I like the prequels, shoot me)and still think it has the best Vader and Luke face off. And to stray from the subject a little, I'm almost in favor of them changing the scene in ANH when Obi Wan and Vader fight. I just saw that recently and thought, this is supposed to be swordfighting?! Lucas dug his own grave with the sequels I guess, making everybody do flips and stuff. And just to sneak it in, Michael Moore is an assclown. Cheerio
-
Jun 15, 2004 9:19:51 AM CDT
"Quit making ridiculous claims about how one movie is ripping of
by toolfan
Okay first of all, maybe you should READ the books before you start writing ill-conceived defensive posts. I'm aware of what's in the books, and I know what I saw. The similarities are with the MOVIE. Does the book have panoramic shots of Elephonts stomping towards the screen? Does it have Legolas single-handedly felling one a la Luke Skywalker? No. Does LOTR the book have a PICTURE of the Nazgul leader? No.
My points are still valid, and yes I DID enjoy the movies - that wasn't even in question. But no one should claim the Return of the King is that original from a CINEMATIC pov. Sod the book, its not even an issue. -
I really hope Batman begins brakes some moulds IMOHO The crow is easily the best comic book hero movie ever tho if it counts.
-
Why does it suck. Simple. Spider-man is digital. Remember Darth Maul? How cool would he have been if he were digital? They missed the boat. Human acrobatics and kung fu cannot be keyframed. You have him in a mask for chrissake. They could have assembled gymnasts, martial artists, capoiera masters to be Spider-man. Stunts are always best performed by stuntmen. When I think of Spider-man i think of the ultimate acrobatic ninja. The fights in Gymkata are way more exciting. That is why Spider man sucks. No matter what they do it willl always fall short
-
...a nitpick? Yes, a minor one. Amazing Spider-Man would have made such a better title. I mean , come on. Spider-Man 2? 2??? There is simply no creativity in that. Sticking a number on a sequel is really a thing of the past, anyway. Sure, you still see it these days, but not as much. Subtitles are more popular, or "creative" titling. Long running series like Star Trek, Friday the 13th, and the like have dropped the numbers. It's a nitpick, to be sure. It doesn't change the context of the movie. But Amazing Spider-Man would have been so much cooler. Then part 3 could have been Web of Spider-Man, and 4 could have been Spectacular Spider-Man, etc. Part 6 would be a good one: Spider-Man: Sinister Six. HAHA! THat just oozes cool!
-
And never was, to begin with. Anyway, Spidey 2 is looking to be excellent. Pity that this talkback has turned into an ESB/LOTR debate. The reviewer never said it was better or as good as The Empire Strikes Back. They're two completely different stories and genres, and therefore a comparison is impossible.
-
for spiderman being the most over-rated movie in recent memory. my only consolation was the wife and i spending 3 bucks renting the dvd instead of $12 at the theater; although i would've gotten more entertainment spending that 3 bucks on a half dozen items at taco bell and then trying to not crap my pants...
-
1) this movie is not as good as Empire. It's not in the same league as Empire. It's not even the same fucking sport. 2) CGI Spider-Man sucks ass. It sucked ass in the first film and it sucks ass in this one. What pisses me off is that the Star Wars haters (pretty much every bandwagon jumping bitch here)rip on Star Wars because there's too much CGI but like Spider-Man where the main character is almost always CGI. 3) The LOTR movies are gay and time will tell that. As for it not ripping off Star Wars because the book was written 50 years ago, we're talking about the movie, not the book. Every fantasy/sci-fi/FX driven film would be 20 years behind if it wasn't for Lucas and Star Wars. That didn't stop LOTR from being a boring, contrived piece of drivel but helped it a little.
-
Get over it, shitbirds. Spidey 2 will own your dumb LOTR-bashing-cos-you-can't-take-it-that-someone-has-shown-SW-for-the-shit-it-really-is asses.
-
First you stress the fact that there are very few blacks on this site, indicating an obvious awareness that you are addressing a white (non-black at the very least) audience, then turn around and accuse gus of being an uncle tom, self-hating racist using the term 'nigger'. What! Lol. That's all sorts of backwards. I suspect that you may not even be what you claim you are (black) and if so...shut the fuck up anyway bitch! Get some self-respect and quit whining! What
-
No. If you like Star Wars, will you live forever? No. Stop acting so vicious over a competition that shouldn't even exist in the first place.
-
Alright morons...if you think you can make better movies than these, get your loser-nerd asses to film school and do it. Prove to the fans that you can do a better job, otherwise shut the hell up.
-
Jun 15, 2004 3:51:42 PM CDT
Spiderman 2 will scare my momma!!!! Will scare all your mommas!!
by macauley_sulkin
I've just noticed what clever names we've all thought of!
-
HOW! - dare you, COMPARE! - Spiderman 2 to MY! - brilliant ass kicking of that cheezy GUY! - who was from Fantasy Island, then tried to kill me in Star Trek 2. Spidey 2 will be all cartoon comic BOOK! - looking and feel, and will never have the down to EARTH! - heaviness and dramatic heat that my FILM! - had. No DEPTH AT ALL! The needs of the one OUTWEIGH! - the needs of the many. That is my hairpiece OUTWEIGHING! - that of even my TJ Hooker STOMACH! - and all the burgers filling IT!
-
Jun 15, 2004 4:46:24 PM CDT
Spider-Man 2 will steal your car and bring it back in pieces wit
by iamjacksuserid
Spider-Man 2 will drink all of your beer. Spider-Man 2 will call China and talk for 5 hours on your home phone. Spider-Man 2 will base rape your ass on Battlefield Vietnam. Spider-Man 2 will ask your mom out on a date. Spider-Man 2 will wear your best boxers and eat a bunch of beans and chili. Spider-Man 2 will save your game 1 millisecond before you get killed.
-
Spiderman 1 was not a great film, but it was a good film, I thought. I enjoyed
it at the theater, and I liked it enough to buy it on DVD and watch it a few more
times. I am certainly planning to go see 2. Still, I think that the fact that I
used to buy Spidey comics (and a few other Marvel titles) when I was a kid (
mostly) added to my enjoyment; without that context, I don't think I would have
liked it quite as much as I did. Obviously, MANY people liked it, not just
comics fans; repeat viewing notwithstanding, Spiderman 1 could not have achieved
its level of financial success without several million non-comics-fans buying
tickets. I think what too rarely gets mentioned around here is the impact of the
adult female viewer on ticket sales. I think a lot of women liked Kirsten as MJ,
related to her, rooted for her, took an interest in the romance, felt sad when
Peter told her they could only be friends, and had a "What the?" experience when
she touched her lips at the end signifying that she may have recognized Peter's
kiss. I liked all that too -- and the wet shirt! And now, I have a few
questions. I mean no sarcasm and I have no hidden agenda; I would really just
like to hear some viewpoints. QUESTION 1: To you young 'uns out there, say, 25
or less (I am 41), do you really consider ESB to be one of the greatest movies of
all time? If so, why? It came out before you were born or when you were an
infant. Is it that timeless? I think I largely loved it to the degree I do
because I was an impressionable youth when I saw it at the theater (even then, I
liked ANH a bit better, though). Plus (please don't take this as an insult), you
people seem more jaded and difficult to please than we were when we were young.
QUESTION 2: Why do posters here exaggerate their feelings so much? If a movie
does not live up to one's expectations or hopes, why can't the person just say
that and explain why he felt that way, rather than saying it "sucked sweaty
donkey balls," for example? For me, rare is the movie that I can't find
something good or interesting in it. But maybe that's why I read reviews BEFORE
I decide to go to the theater. For example, I have never seen Gigli, and it is
quite possible that it rigli (sorry) DOES suck donkey balls. I think if I
thought Spiderman 1 were as bad as some people here are pretending to believe it
was, I would be too embarrassed to admit that I had paid money to see it! For
example, for one poster to have said that TTT bored him "to tears" calls into
question something about his judgement in going to the movie at all, doesn't it?
QUESTION 3: Seriously, I want to know, why do posters seem to need to compare
movies? For example, how does your love for SW make you need to bash LOTR
lovers? And vice versa? I bet I love SW as much as you do. I also love LOTR as
much as the LOTR lover. Is it my imagination, or do some talkbackers actually
believe that MY ability to love both (plus a fair handful of other movies) represents the aberration here? -
I don't post on here often, but fuck me if that isn't one of the best most important posts ever read here, I don't know what is. I salute you man for making a damn fine post with a point. Ty^
-
Aliens had NONE of the dread of the first movie and was a piece of shit. All thrill and ZERO horror...with really cheeeeesy one liners and every character was a screaming cliche. Alien was an ultra gothic creep out. As far as Back to the Future, 2 & 3 were only retreads of the original and were completely unnecessary and a waste of celluloid. Anyone who likes Cameron as a director is questionable in my book. The first Terminator movie is the only good movie he's ever made, and he ripped that off from Harlan Ellison.
-
...speak of sequels that surpass the originals without paying tribute to the fastest, most furious sequel of them all? And what of the much beloved Critters franchise? I kid because I can. There hath been much shit spake in this talkback, and much of it spoken by they who have clearly forgotten the faces of their fathers. Lucas ripped off virtually every element of Star Wars from somwhere else and slapped a fresh coat of special effects on it when he was done. That gave us a fun, fantastical film with ground-breaking technology employed in the service of our entertainment (just think if that energy had been harnessed for a more productive purpose... we might have rocket cars today), but the finished film was by no means worthy of a spot on the AFI top 100. Empire easily surpassed it in all areas and became a moving, exciting drama in its own right. Then some fool let Lucas back into the preproduction brainstorming sessions on ROTJ and we wound up with Ewoks instead of Wookies tearing Stormtrooper arms out of their sockets (as provided for in the originally intended final battle on Kysshyk). Lucas is naught but a greedy fool with his eyes on the lunch money of pre-teen fanboys everywhere. He prostituted his vision before it was even finished and the end product (not to mention the ghastly prequels) suffered for all his cross-marketing savvy. The Lord of the Rings trilogy brilliantly executed but, once the new-movie smell has worn off, I can't imagine ever enjoying one of those films without watching the other two in extremely close proximity. They were shot all at once and tell a continuous story. Hence, I don't think you can look at Fellowship and judge the sequels (TTT & ROTK) in quite the same way you would the Star Wars films (or most other films with sequels), which were handled by different directorial/writing combos and were released several years apart, picking up after a fair amount of time has elapsed in the narrative. Only actually watching the Spider Man sequel will tell us whether the Empire comparison is more apt than a Two Towers comparison (if this reviewer's description is to be believed, I would suspect the latter and that he chose his benchmark poorly). But none of that will matter worth a hill of dung because the gold standard for all sequel comparisons has to be Godfather II. Therefore, unless Tobey kisses DiFranco on the forehead and tells him "You broke my heart, Harry!" Spider Man 2 will not be even obscurely comparable to the greatest sequel of all time. I do still believe, however, that it will sell out all of its opening night showings and many a showing thereafter. Will that piss many of you off? More importantly, will the world tremble at your impotent rage? All of this weighty intellectual cinematic and metaphysical discussion makes me want to fart.
-
is pretty goddamn great in my book. If I saw a dude in red and blue tights swinging around downtown Cincinnati...I don't think it would look "real". Sure, weight and mass are involved; but we're talking about a dude that sticks to fucking walls. It's like saying the comics suck because "no real human could bend that way". No fucking shit.
-
Jun 15, 2004 6:40:12 PM CDT
To those of you saying Spider-Man 2 rips off Superman 2...
by blue_demon
Um. He gave up being Spider-Man in a comic story YEARS before Superman 2 was shot. I think it's a famous John Romita cover which shows Peter Parker walking away from a Spider-Man costume he's tossed in a trash can. Oh...and to the person who said that the war elephants ROTK were rip-offs of the AT-AT walkers in ESB, did you actually think before you typed that? Empire strikes back was released in what? 1980? The Lord of The Rings was published in the 50s! The Naz Gul was Vader? No my friend, you have it backwards. Luke=Frodo, Gandalf=Obi-Wan, Han Solo=Aragorn. Anybody saying otherwise is denial. Not pissing on Star Wars, the first two ( A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back ) were some of my favorite movies when I was a kid. Okay, they didn't age well and lots of the dialogue is wince-inducing ("I don't know where you get your delusions Laser Brain." LASER BRAIN??!! )but they were fun. And to those who can't seem to stop knocking the Lord of the Rings movie trilogy: C'mon man, those were fantastic! A few rough spots but they pale in comparison to the rest of the movie. Some scenes look like fantastic illustrations from fairy tales. The Black Riders leaving Mordor after Gollum reveals the name "Baggins," the first view of Loth Lorien at night, The Mines of Moria and probably my favorite scene in the whole trilogy: The Witch King's dragon mount perching on the castle wall and stetching its wings. I mean, DAMN! But...this is a Spider-Man talkback so allow me to say that the scenes shown in the previews make me real itchy to see this one. I love Dr. Octopus climbing that building with his arms, and Spider-Man bouncing all over the inside of that subway car. That's it...it's official. CGI can do anything. We can make any story come to life now. :) Man, July 2nd can't get here soon enough.
-
... i actually forgot how good his stuff was. Probably because I'd over-watched Aliens and Terminator in my teens. However, when he came to the IMAX in London, there was a twenty minute compilation of his work: The T-1000 truck chase, the troops ambushed by the Aliens, the Titanic splitting in half. And damn, did it remind me what a good director he is. Of course, this was after a summer of sitting through tripe like Daredevil, etc, but you have to admit his work still holds up.
-
Aliens is great, and is better than Alien. It had great one liners, and the only characters who were truly cliched were the panicking Lieutenant and the latina soldier who had to out-man the men. As to someone letting George Lucas into the ROTJ preproduction brainstorming sessions; you're kidding right? No one has 'let' Lucas do anything with regards to Star Wars since the first one. He has complete control. So while yes obviously he should be blamed for taking the ground component of the otherwise awesome end battle in ROTJ and turning it into somewhat of a joke; no one let him do it. I imagine there have been many people inside of Lucasfilm who have at least privately protested Lucas' many bad decisions that have resulted in SW going from the top franchise to just another franchise, albeit a very successful franchise, but Lucas doesn't have to answer to anyone.
And Empire Strikes Back is one of the greatest films ever, easily as good as the LoTR films which are of course each great. As to the Star Wars characters being new incarnations of the LoTR characters: While Lucas most certainly was influenced by LoTR, he was also influenced by many other sources such as Westerns, that Japanese guy, and Joseph Conrad. But if one is to compare the two based on your comparisons there is one area in which SW definitely wins and that is the whole Vader/Nazgul equation. The Nazgul are some of the coolest, most visually striking villains ever, but they really don't accomplish much of anything, whereas Vader actually wins a battle or two. I guess my gripe here is with Tolkien, but come on. The Nazgul allow themselves to be driven off singlehandedly by Aragorn in the first one. Then in the third, they show up to awesome effect on those flying beasts, but then inexplicaby disappear when they are needed most to disrupt the charge of Theoden. All except the Witch King that is, and his demise was the lamest part of the movie. It wasn't so much that he lost because of a hobbit stabbing him from behind, but what sucked was that he didn't do more damage on the battlefield first, and that he didn't face off against a worthy opponent first, of who there are only two; Aragorn and Gandalf. I can't believe Jackson put that scene in the movie where the Witch King promised the orc commander to 'break' Ganfalf (a truly awesome scene)and then they have no show down. Then at least when he was on the ground at the same time as Aragorn arrived, I was thinking that maybe these two heavyweights would face off. But no, the Witch King, for all of his menacing persona, goes down like a boxer with a glass chin. That had to be one of the biggest teases ever. That may very well have been the greatest battle sequence ever put on film if not for that total let down. I'm told that Jackson did make some significant changes from the books, and that's all good and well, but he should have made another and given the Witch King and his Nazgul subordinates a bigger role. I get it if the point is to have the main villain be the Satan-like spirit of Sauron, who is faceless tempting force. But it still would have been nice if the LoTR movies had elevated the Witch King so as to creat a villain who truly is Vader-like in his appeal to the public. -
Everything Cameron touches is a pile of polished shit....but we will never agree there. His best role would be as a technical advisor, but somehow he got into directing. Incidentally, The Abyss was the first sci-fi movie I ever walked out on. Close Encounters meets Flipper...eeeeeeek. And also, the aliens died WAY too easily in Camerons glorified video game. As far as the oddments in ROTK, I understand your complaints. When Merry stabs the Witchking in the book, the blade he has posesses a certain lineage and magic that is very hurtful to the witchking, thus weakening him for Eowyns death stroke. It did not come across in the film! Also, the face off between Gandalf and the witchking will be in the extended version of the dvd...but it is a shame that it wasn't in the theatrical version. Another strange thing is that Merry's injuries seem to dissappear suddenly so that he can go for a ride to the black gate. In the book, he suffered from the "black breath" of the witch king, and Aragorn helped heal him, as well as Eowyn. Hopefully this will be in the extended version also.
-
As far as Aragorn being able to chase away the Nazgul in the first film...The Nazgul had acomplished their mission, the knife wound was turning Frodo into a wraith like them. There was no need for them to kill Frodo. In the book they planted this wound in Frodo and bidded their time, knowing that Frodo and company would be trapped by them "in a narrow place"" at the ford of Bruinnen before they could get Frodo to Rivendell and Elronds "medicine". What they didn't plan on, was that hobbits are stronger than they appear, as the Nazgul expected to get Frodo under their power long before the final showdown at the river. This was not envisioned well in the movie, where it looks as if their plans to kill Frodo and take the ring are frustrated. There...all geeked out...pant.
-
Any stupid ass reviewer who compares Spiderman 2 to classics like Star Wars episodes 4-6, ROTK, Aliens (best fucking sci-fi horror there is with the best lines ever), and any other film he mentioned is a fat out lie. No fucking way this POS graphical monstocity could ever be as good as these movies. Spiderman is a b-rated movie with a comic mentality.. hence..it will suck like the first. Spiderman 2 in every trailer looks like a trash filled, CGI horror. Peter Parker can suck on my Pulsating Pecker.
-
...keep in mind that these creatures, albeit small and furry and, dare I say cute, would have DEVOURED THE FLESH of Han and crew had it not been for Luke's floating C3-P0 trick.
-
Jun 16, 2004 1:18:48 AM CDT
People who randomly bring up "LOTR Rules" for no apparent reason
by tall_boy
seriously, if you're THAT fucked up to say "LOTR OWNS EVERYTHING" for no apparent reason and with no urging you need professional fucking help. Stop screaming it from the high heavens, you're just reinforcing how much of a douchebag you are, douchebag.
-
Let me try to address these as best I can. I suspect that you have some suspicions as to the answers yourself, but I think it's cool that you'd rather not jump to immediate conclusions. Okay: 1)I wouldn't really be able to give you an insider's perspective on this one, since I don't find ESB to be the greatest movie ever. There are a couple of things to think about: for starters, I've noticed that there are a lot of talkbackers who regurgitate what's already been said. People hear something they like, they repeat it, it has the same effect, etc., and gradually, it makes its way into a TB'ers lexicon, where people say something as fact that they couldn't possibly have thought up because of the sheer idiosyncracity of it, the "Green Goblin looked like a Power Ranger" hoopla being a pretty good example. So the same type of people hear ESB being called one of the bestest movies in ever, and voila! You've got yourself a sort of Top 10 List via brainwashing. // Another possibility is that most people don't actually place movies on "Best of..." lists, and so ESB sounds like as good a title as any to go with, partly because of its fame. It has to be special if it's famous, right? // Yet another reason is that maybe these 19-year old hooligans DID discover 'A New Hope' as kids through their parents (or even when the series was re-released in theaters in '97), and so it does mean something to them. I can't think of many PG-rated blockbuster movies that kids would be exposed to first. Maybe the next generation's kids will prefer Harry Potter or even (gasp!) Epp. I-III, although the books and the OT will probably hold up better than those movies will, respectively. And if that's the case, take it as testimony towards how great of an experience the Star Wars trilogy can be for those seeing it with fresh eyes. Okay, moving on... 2) I don't know. I do this sometimes too, and even though I don't really think about it on a conscious level when I'm doing it, I guess I'd have to say it's either because I want to provoke a response in order to draw attention to certain things I have to say about the movie or because I'm too lazy to think of a more accurate way of articulating my feelings. // 3) This one I'm not gonna touch. I know for some people it's like following a sports team. On the other side of things, a lot of the hating of new(er) stuff *probably* comes from insecurity, or a fan's feeling that they need to protect their movie's place in the world, the only way to do that being keeping it in the same place, if you see what I'm saying. But there are too many responses to this issue for me to lay down any sort of all-encompassing theory. There probably is none anyway, but if more people respond to your questions, maybe we'll get a better understanding of the conflict. Hope this was of use to you. These ideas are kind of half-formed anyway,; I don't pretend to actually know why people do what they do, especially when a lot of it could be bullshit, but I felt like I should try to give you some sort of answers to your questions, so there it is. Take care.
-
...it's called a visual quote, guys. Yes, Lord of the Rings was published some 30 years before The Battle of Hoth was filmed, but Tolkien never said that any Oliphaunts fell in that EXACT SAME WAY. They fell. On the other hand, Lucas (or rather Kasdan) showed EXACTLY HOW his great beasts fell, and while (t)he(y) could have been inspired to USE them gigantoids in the battle because of the oliphaunts at Pelennor Fields, there's as good a chance that Jackson was inspired to frame the felling of that one particular, now-infamous Mumak to look EXACTLY the way it was SHOWN in 'The Empire Strikes Back.' So maybe Tolkien "inspired" Lucas who "inspired" Jackson, just in different ways. It's not an either/or situation. Yeesh. Where were you crazies to point out that the 'Constantine' script was written before 'The Matrix: Reloaded' even came out when all of THAT noise was goin' on? As a matter of interest, does its being unoriginal make RotK any worse in the grand scheme of things? It still makes sense within the story to have an oliphaunt fall; how it falls is incidental, unless it falls shittily (probably not a real word, but whatever). Also, I think whichever side is right should demand an apology and a free pizza from everyone that called them "fuckbrains" and "pooperscoopers." That's all I gots ta say about THAT.
-
well the original POTA's own every franchise, at least they have some kind of social commentary and good and evil aren't so clear , even if they do have that gun toting Bushite Heston in and you know if you just close your eyes throughout the last 2 films and ignore the fact that the apes masks are looking comparable to Jackos face it's ok !
on another note I liked the Ewoks, i mean the ewoks movies return to Endor and errr ..the other one? they were pretty cool weren't they ? way better than empire ffs. ok i'm joking -
Im waiting for U Got Served 2
-
...I agree with much of what you say, with the following exceptions: 1.) Aliens is NOT in any reality or alternate universe a better movie than Alien. It's a completely different kind of film and I would never compare the two directly. However, since you seem intent on doing so, you should acknowledge that Aliens is essentially a war movie in space while Alien is a horror film. Alien has drama, tension, subtle character development and manages to make the creature terrifying by revealing only pieces of it throughout (until the ending). It's masterfully crafted. Aliens has a bunch of well-captured types as characters, multiplies the adrenaline factor by introducing tons of creatures and explosions, and ends with a WWF-style knock-down, drag-out cage match. As I've said before, I can completely understand why someone who prefers the thrill of NASCAR to the intricacies of chess might say Aliens was a better film, but I will disagree with that individual all the way down where my own tastes are concerned. 2.) Empire was such a good movie precisely because Lucas was relatively (key word) hands off. His original treatment of the story was re-written by more talented writers and the film was largely directed by Lawrence Kasdan (The Big Chill, Silverado), who helped raise this particular installment of the mythos head and shoulders above anything that came before or after it. Lucas thought it was too dark for the kiddies, who are supposed to be buying his toys, so he replaced an intended kick-ass fight scene in ROTJ between Imperial forces and wookies with the teddy-bear fest we got. I realize Lucas can do whatever he wants with his property, but you have to agree that the best thing to come out of his lifelong franchise (Empire) was also the project he was least directly involved with. Oh... and Kurasawa was the Japanese guy he ripped off. He also ripped off himself, lifting Han Solo's character directly from American Graffiti. Lucas is now the most powerful joke in the film industry.
-
...mea maxima culpa! I typed before double-checking my failing memory! Kasdan directed Return of the Jedi (and did a pretty good job, despite Lucas' idiotic story changes). Irv Kershner directed Empire. My point remaining that Lucas didn't make Empire great... the director did (thanks, Irv). All Lucas has really done for Star Wars since outlining the greater story arc (which he used to claim was 9 movies, not 6) and bringing the first (fourth) film into the world, is muck things up. He sucks. On TLOR, Jackson's extended cuts are the definitive versions of those films and are much truer to the story as told in the books (although still altered significantly in places). This hamstrings the trilogy as far as making the best vision of the complete story relatively daunting to your average ADD-suffering Aliens fan (sorry guys, couldn't resist). It (jackson's extended trilogy) may well be the next Gone With the Wind or The Ten COmmandements, requiring entire days to be set aside on a semi-annual basis for a marathon viewing by dedicated afficianados, but completely alienating vasst numbers of potential viewers. That's too bad, but I don't know how he (Jackson) could've avoided that. As for the Spider Man movies, so far they've been very accessible and great fun. The Green Goblin was a poorly executed character (through no fault of DaFoe's, they just shouldn't have covered up his already quite creepy face with a helmet straight out of Japanime), but the first film did a fine job of encapsulating the main character's dynamic (geeky kid gets superpowers and realizes they can make his life more miserable than it already was). To say the CGI sucked is just silly. It's as good as anything else out there EXCEPT maybe the shinola Lucas slathers on his current crapfests to disguise the fact that they're devoid of genuine fun and imagination.
-
The whole thing about the aliens dying easily in Aliens is not to big a deal to me considering that in the first film that crew was civilian, and had no weapons, other than that flamethrower which isn't successfully used on the alien. In Aliens they were facing soldiers with powerful weapons. As to RoTK; I hear what you're saying, but still....I haven't read the books, but I'm told that even there Gandalf and the Witch King don't actually fight; they just make threats against each other and right as they are about to fight, the WK has to leave to face Theoden's army. I obviously can't speak to the differences between the book and movies, but I'm told that Jackson did make some significant changes. Since I find very little fault with the series, I'll assume the changes were for the best. I just wish that the WK's role had been expanded so that he could actually face Aragorn and/or Gandalf seeing as how they were the only worthy opponents in terms of prowess. He still could have suffered such an ignominious death, but at least he could have done something first to warrant the obvious dread that Gandalf expressed about the WK leading the battle when he spoke of him to one of the hobbits. Thanks for the info about the stabbing of Frodo encounter in the first one. It just seemed a bit odd that they were dismissed so easily, especially considering their strength.
-
hey jack..just like to pick up on what you were saying cos you missed a few details out ;)....spiderman 2 will vomit on your dinner!...spiderman 2 will marry your sister and then cheat on her with it's cousin!...spiderman 2 will say hello to your liddle friend!...spiderman will take your copy of battlefield vietnam and replace it with battlefield modern combat!....spiderman 2 will unplug your refridgerator and spoil your food!...spiderman 2 will put flouride in your non flouride toothpaste!...Spiderman 2 will mock your belief system!...Spiderman 2 will promise free form level design inspired by GTA,dazzleing visuals evocative of the movie,clever villan AI,a fun challenge and authentic voice recording from the movie actors and then deliver on none of those promises!...spiderman 2 will take your momma out all night,and show her what it's all about,get her jacked up on some cheap champagene and let the good times all roll out!!!
-
1. I get it that Alien is a horror movie, while Aliens is an action movie. But Aliens also has drama, suspense, tension, and character development -- its what elevates it above almost all other action films just as it elevates Alien above most horror movies. Sigourney Weaver did get nominated for a Best Actress oscar for her performance in Aliens. 2. As for Lucas/SW: Yes, I agree that Empire is the best of the bunch, and I think its a shame that the series peaked with its second installment out of six. Well actually, its not so bad that it peaked then, but rather that what followed hasn't really been close. I mean, if Empire is a 10, then followups of 8 or 9 quality would have been fine, but instead...well, to each his own. I agree with the theory that its not coincidence that the best is the one where Lucas let a more talented writer write the screenplay and a better director direct the actors. I wish Lucas had followed that approach for the Prequels -- ideally completely, but partial might have worked to. By that I mean had he done the script but let someone else direct, or had he let someone else write the script while he directed. Either way I think all the talented actors would have risen to either the better script or better direction. So yes, I think Lucas has, to an extent, sabotaged his own legacy by insisting on subjecting the Prequels to his screenwriting and direction. Its even more of a shame considering how Lucas really could have had his pick of talent to do the writing or directing for him, including Spielberg who said he would have loved to direct a SW movie. I'll bet such hypothetical directors would have done it on the cheap just to be able to be involved with SW. Its just a shame. But as to Lucas ripping off others; I'll give him credit for being more creative than that implies. I mean, I'm sure even Tolkien had influences, like Beowulf for example. The Bible and his Catholocism was definitely an influence considering LoTR has at least 3 Christ-like figures. So I'll credit Lucas for blending the many influences he had with his own ideas to come up with a truly creative series, but like you I agree he has prevented the series from reaching its true potential aside from Empire. I can't stand it when people blame the actors in the Prequels after having called Lucas an awful writer and hack director. Its just not fair; either Lucas got from them what he wanted, or he failed to direct properly. Either way the buck stops with him. I can't blame the three lead actors who have been great in other parts (though I think they are mostly good in the Prequels too--I think Portman and Christensen take alot of unfair flack considering they had to most complex roles yet were given so little to work with, but still I contend their acting is good but that people refuse to see it because of the bizarre, distracting, and sometime awful dialogue Lucas inflict upon them). As to Return of the Jedi; I think it is very good except for spectacle of the 'best legion' of stormtroopers being undone largely by the ewoks. A Wookie fight would have been great. I didn't realize he substituted the Ewoks for the Wookies. 3. Aliens, especially the extended version is not a short film for ADD sufferers. Its about 2.5 hours long, which alot for an action film. True Aliens was a departure from Alien, but what did you want, more of the same? 4. As to the LoTR extended versions; I just hope he took some license and had Witch King and Gandalf actually fight -- not because I need constant action to enjoy a film. What makes LoTR great is obviously the mixture of the grand epic spectacle with the small moments, but yes damnit I like to see intense showdowns between the best each side has to offer, like Hector versus Achilles. 5. Spiderman was good, not great. I think much of the goodwill extended towards it wasn't so much for its merits, but rather as a hammer by which to beat Attack of the Clones over the head with. I mean, the Peter-Mary Jane romance was rushed, and poorly written with some really bad dialogue. And Peter came across as more of a stalker than Anakin did in AOTC for crying out loud. And Portman and Christensen did a better job of making me think they at least desired each other than Tobey and Dunst. Yet it got a free pass because of the much bigger SW target. Not that the AOTC romance didn't deserve some ridicule--Lucas really shortchanged everyone there-- but Spiderman's was't exactly Casablanca or Gone With the Wind. But it was good overall, and I expect the sequel to be better based on most of what I've heard.
-
I think the reason that I like Alien better is just a straightforward one. I prefer my aliens in a gothic dread atmosphere than in an action film. I think it all boils down to personal taste. And considering Gigers artwork and sensibility, it was meant to be in that frame. As far as ROTK goes, in the book, the witchking confronts Gandalf with words and breaks his staff (emasculation). Tolkien was always about the words having more power than action. So alot of the action in the movie version was invented or "punched up". For Tolkien, the poetry of the dark speech from the Witchkings mouth is far more chilling than anything he could have done to Gandalf. But, just try to convey that in a film! So, really, I think Jackson had to change many things in order to make it work out on film. More often than not, I think he suceeded.
-
I think most of society today suffers from some form of induced ADD, not just Aliens fans. I know I do. And when mine is particularly ascendant, I know I have an easier time with the pace of Aliens than I do with Alien (although I still like the original better). Know what I mean?
-
You should have triple-checked. Richard Marquand directed ROTJ, without a hint of style. The performances are awful, too; Ford in particular seems bored. If you're younger and saw the films all together, you can't imagine what a dissapointment this was. Three years of waiting after Empire's cliffhanger, and we got bad muppets in the Jabba sequence (Carpenter's Thing came out around the same time, so there's no excuse), ewoks, a cheap way out of the love triangle ("I'm your sister. Yep. You know it's true." "Wow, I guess you're right." Never mind that when you now watch the earlier films it's really creepy when they flirt and even kiss.) a rehash of the Death Star attack with better effects, and a Darth Vader who turned out to be the Pillsbury Doughboy and had a completely different voice when unmasked. Did anyone else old enough to see the initial release feel this way?( BTW, Lucas wanted David Lynch to direct. Wouldn't you like to see that version in some alternate universe? Though he would have been fired after two days). Oh, yeah, Spiderman 2: Um, looks good, Dock Ock, cool. Hope the effects are better.
-
Richard Marquand directed ROTJ, Irv did ESB and Kasdan has writing credits. You're writing suggests intelligence, but seriously, do you're homework. IMDB is just a click away, and it doesn't take nearly as long as all that thumbing through your thesaurus. As for me, all the Ritalin in the world couldn't get me to like Alien better than Aliens. It might be a good idea for guys like you and a few others around here to get off your high intellectual horses and allow for the possibility that in this abstract world of entertainment (abstract, as in lacking the concrete evidence that can be found in the sciences or in history) the qualities you cite in support for your conclusions do not make your opinion absolute and uncontrovertable. In other words--we who disagree with you are not wrong, or at least we don't deserve your condescension (NASCAR = stupid, Chess = smarty-pants). I may be making up words here, for all I know, but I think I'm conveying my point. I suggest tacking an IMO to your posts to diminish the effect of the elitism oozing out of them. Oh, and you're right about Godfather Part II, IMHO.
The difference between the rest of us dimwits who claim our opinions superior to everyone else's and what you or people like McGinty are doing is that you guys rely on this outside force, academia, to vindicate your opinions without noting the imperfections inherent to that field of study. For shame! It's your opinion, or its mcGinty's opinion, and publishing papers or playing chess does not elevate the relevance of that opinion, so stop asserting or implying that it does!
(To everyone: I crossed swords with CR and McGinty about Alien v. Aliens before, I guess I'm still annoyed.)
On to Spiderman 2. The first one was hugely overrated--that doesnt sound like it's news to any of you. The second looks better, but comparing it to ESB... please. I'll see the movie and help it gross that 500 mil it does not deserve, but my praise or condemnation will be based on the good 'ol, down to earth, entertainment value of the film. Also, if I may tack this on, I think the romance helped the gross for the film (someone brought that up earlier) because the film had unremarkable action and there aren't enough nerds (folks seeing the movie because they love the comic so much) out there to bring in that boxoffice.
I'd like to say that upon rereading this post, I find it way too preachy.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts