Jan. 18, 2011, 9:45 a.m. CST
You can clearly see webshooters on his wrists in the image sent out last week.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:45 a.m. CST
Nothing really. I prefer organic shooters, too
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:46 a.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:47 a.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST
...but got turned down because it dissolved after a few minutes. And he thought about refining it to last longer but gave up that idea because it might take "week, or even months!"
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST
to sit on my device! (I'm talking about my penis)
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:49 a.m. CST
Yes I understand that it turns out she's apparently been a natural blond all along, but still, I'm not like this look on her at alllllllllllllll. She looks infinitely more sexy in Zombieland or Superbad.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:51 a.m. CST
whats cooler than the fact that he developed the web shooters? nothing! that is the coolest thing about spidey! those wrist contraptions are so badass. what is cool about a organic web shooters? nothing. its slightly gross. as a long time spidey fan, stick with the originals.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:52 a.m. CST
The spider bite seems like an oddly plausible explanation for the web shooting--it goes along with his enhanced reflexes, etc. A high school kid somehow inventing the material plus a method to mass produce it, compactly store it, and efficiently and accurately project and control it--all with a teenager's budget and resources--that's less plausible for some reason.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:58 a.m. CST
by Stereotypical Evil Archer
I'm still waiting for a more realistic take on the story.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:03 a.m. CST
the charm of spider-man is that peter parker was smart enuff to create the web shooters and did try to sell the stuff... but it only lasted for 1 hour and nobody was interested in a glue that only lasts 1 hour... that is one of the many awesome elements that make peter parker the down to earth "loser" that has so much against him personally, spider-man-ly and professionally... and he always sacrifices to do what's right... Plus, I loved it when spider-man is in a pitch battle and he runs out of web fluid!!! THAT IS GREAT STORY... now spidey needs to step it up and figure a way out... and we the reader are right there with him, holding our breath, flipping the page... Shooting body fluids all over the city IS NOT even close to the character we all grew up with... we all fell in love with... George Peter Gatsis
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:07 a.m. CST
bodily fluids on Emma Stone... am I right??
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:08 a.m. CST
The mechanical web-shooters are way cooler and much better storywise...You get Parker bitten by a spider that enhances his human abilities, but doesn't make him "super human," and then Parker uses his smarts and ingenuity to enhance his dumb luck with a technology that really turns him into a super hero. It shows he has brains. The organic/mutant thing was just another of the lame ideas Raimi introduced in his overrated version of Spider-Man.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:08 a.m. CST
Peter Parker needing money to help his aunt, to pay the bills and to buy more chemicals to make his web fluid and mend his costume or stitch an new one... IS CHARACTER DEVELOPING MOMENTS that make the stories that much more personal to the reader... GPG
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:09 a.m. CST
This movie deserves to tank. I hope Sony suffers for what they did to the fans of the series. You fuck me in the ass, and you want me to thank you for it? Sony could have easily continued the series with a different director if they had such beef with Raimi. Fucking Twilight has like three different directors already! At least give the fans a decent ending to the series! This is a cash grab by Sony and big fuck you to Marvel before they have to hand the rights back to them. So, now what? Marvel has to reboot again? Yeah, Sony fucked everyone with this reboot and they're gonna laugh their way to the bank. Harry, please stop plugging this piece of shit. I don't care if they promised you an exclusive screening at the fucking Alamo. I don't care if they promised you free screenings for life. Fuck this fucking movie.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:13 a.m. CST
The fact that Peter Parker had to make and maintain them in the comics reflected on his industriousness and and his inclination toward science. That nuts-and-bolts aspect brought the character down to earth somewhat. Hey, I liked the organic take, too. However, how realistic does it seem that Spider-Man would have an endless supply of "organic" webbing to shoot all over the city? With the mechanical shooters, he would sometimes run out, leading to some hairy moments.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:13 a.m. CST
your blood pressure must be through the roof! It's just a movie.. chill out...
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:16 a.m. CST
I absolutely could not agree more...
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:17 a.m. CST
lettersoftransit is right, Peter originally tried to sell the web formula to a glue company when he needed cash. However, the web formula is only intended to last for one hour, long enough for the police to get the perps without them trying to figure out how to get them out of the webbing. The glue company shot him down because no one needs glue for just an hour. As for how he creates the web formula, it is explained (though I can't remember which specific comic) that when Peter is bitten he gains an instinctive knowledge of the chemical makeup of webbing, and thus is able to synthesize his own compound. Personally, I think mechanical web shooters make more sense, as spiders don't spin webs out of their legs (wrists), and with organic web shooters the placing is awfully convenient. A great deal of references mocking Spider-man's webbing always show them shooting it out of their backsides, not their wrists. Anyways, I'm really hoping good things come out of this reboot. Not sure I agree with the casting placements (I'd put Stone as MJ and Leary as J. Jonah Jameson) but hopefully it will turn out well. Has to be better than Spider-man 3!
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:23 a.m. CST
I know I'm setting myself up for a lynching, but the organic shooters never bothered me. I never found it plausible that Parker could create something that say, Hank Pym couldn't. If they had shown him developing the web shooters etc it would have taken up too much exposition time when it was covered in half the time it would have needed in the movie. "Oh hey, I got web coming out of my hands! Cool!" and its done in like, 5 minutes. He has webs. Okay, now move along with the plot. OR "I need webs!" Spend ages showing him making them, at which point we are at EXACTLY the same point as we would have been with organic, it just took ages. OR you could have a quick montage which reduces credibility... And one more thing...I don't think it's great story having him run out of webbing, it's a lazy plot device like Kryptonite. AND if he's so super amazing and smart, WHY THE HELL in nearly 50 years has he never ONCE built in an early warning alarm, letting him know when he's running low? He can create a super-epoxy, but can't make a little beep or a light? What the hell... I don't mean to crap all over this, I'm a HUGE spidey fan, but devoting all this time to mechanical webshooters in a movie when WE ALREADY KNOW he can shoot webs is time wasted that could be better spent telling the story or showing emma stone's cleavage. This sort of thing worries me that we are going to get a lengthy rehash of all the "Wow, I can stick to walls!" scenes from the first movie.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:23 a.m. CST
I love the people that say that the organic web shooters are more believable. If that were the case then shouldn't he be shooting webs out his butt? THAT'S where they'd be under that situation, wouldn't it? With that said, has anybody seen the Brown Widow on The Venture Brothers? He's a Spider-man spoof, but they got it right with his shooter coming out of his pooper shooter. Just seeing him bend over, spray out a web, and take off into the night had tears coming out of my eyes. Great stuff.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:23 a.m. CST
Really. WTF? Raimi's films are some of the most successful and profitable super hero films of all time. But the studio geniuses decide to kick him to the curb and reboot the whole series. Will we see Batman reboot in a couple of years? Ironman? Hell, they're doing the same thing with X-Men. The Star Trek reboot/jump start was understandable since the show was 40 years old. But rebooting in a couple of years?
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:27 a.m. CST
...are two great things that go great together.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:28 a.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:32 a.m. CST
Where he said he thinks that the spider bite someone how instictinly made him aware of the ingredients needed to make the webbing. i'm paraphrasing here..but it was on a pretty cool episode about this terminally ill girl that Spiderman goes to see..he tells her his origin, they go out swinging get caught up in a little action against Doc OcK and at the very end of the episode Peter reveals himself to her after she begs him too.
Great point about the costume. If that whole photographer doesn't work out, I think he has a career in fashion, or at the very least a tailor.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:33 a.m. CST
This is going to look so goofy. A guy who has to reload his web slingers. I have a question: How exactly did is this kid supposed to invent a substance that's stronger than steel in his basement? And keep it in a liquid form? That's why the idea of Organic shooters worked so much better. It did away with the pesky idea of having to come up with this shit all the time. And sorry, but people who keep saying "It keeps the tension up when he runs out of web juice when he's fighting" or some sucj bullshit. No, it doesn't. All it does is insure that now in EVERY film at the climax of the film, he's going to be franticly mixing his web juice an trying to load it before (insert villian) kills/rapes (insert victim) and that's going to get tired fucking fast. It's going to be another version of the cliche that killed 24, where Jack Bauer ALWAYS gets framed for being a traitor and there's ALWAYS a mole in CTU. It's going to be overused and becaome a joke. That, ladies and gentlemen, is why the web shooter device is a bad idea.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:36 a.m. CST
The sex scene between Bowie and Candy Clark? The bodily fluid oozing out of his hands and on to her trembling, terrified torso? CC going completely apeshit when it happens? You want something like THAT in this re-boot? I know that some of you do.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:38 a.m. CST
I dont think it has to take a log amount of time..again take a que from the Spiderman Animated series... I though they did a good job..only took like no more than a min..but I think It can be explained in a few minutes tops and the explanation can be fun too.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:43 a.m. CST
Who says Hank Pym couldnt create them..he just never had a reason too..granted I havent picked up a comic on the regular in 20 years (outside of a once in a very blue moon graphic novel). and I just wanted to say I agree with Spiderdan lol.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:45 a.m. CST
I can't listen to him speak in "The Social Network" without thinking of Christensen's whiny acting style and voice.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:50 a.m. CST
Another thing about the organic webs is that they are produced by his body, so wouldn't there be the risk of passing on STD's? A great deal of the people he saves are bleeding from one injury or another. How do they know this kid is clean? I can see it now... "Maam, grad on to my web, and I'll swing you out of this burning building!" "Yeah........do you have any Prell or laytex gloves on you?" "Uh, no." "I think I'll wait for the fire department. Thanks anyway." On the other hand, mechanical shooters don't make much sense either for all the reasons everyone has stated. I think I'll go read Batman. At least he has a gun to shoot his "webs".
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:51 a.m. CST
I thinq he did all right with what was given to him, but it was a bit grating the way his voice would crack sometimes in the prequels. At least with something like Life As A House where he was playing some gothic bisexual or whatever his cracked voice made sense, but as the dude that would be Darth Vader it was off putting.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:51 a.m. CST
How about he makes organic webs that comes out his butt, but since that is inconvenient, he taps the gland to collect the juice every once in a while to load into wrist launchers. In all seriousness the wrist launchers are way better and show more about the character. There was a never a discussion about organic vs mechanical before Sam Raimi was too lazy to make Spiderman properly. Its gross to have Spiderman shooting body fluids all around the city. And I am sorry that a radioactive spider bite giving someone superpowers is "believable" but building web spray and launchers is "not realistic"
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:53 a.m. CST
clearly looking at the interviewer like he's got two heads. i love it!
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:54 a.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:56 a.m. CST
As for the web-shooters, so he creates a little gadget that is basically a cross between silly string and super-glue. It's hardly a teleportation device. And logically, the spider bite somehow giving him the knowledge of how to make it (which is a very late ret-con) still makes more sense than the webs coming out of his wrists not his anus. Oh, and they rarely if ever used the Spider-Sense power in Raimi's movies did they?
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:57 a.m. CST
the side of organic shooter. Look I'm old....er....ish, I grew up with Spiderman and loved him inventing the shooters. It also allows for many interesting dilemmas ie running out of fluid, the time to make it, strengthen it improve it yadda yadda yadda. But being a traditionalist shouldn't stand in the way of improvement. The ability to make and shoot the webbing organically just makes more sense seeing as he developed the other spider abilities (it's not like he shoots it from his ass). I'd be ok with a hybrid as well ie his body can produce the fluid but he needs a way to project it. I'm liking it so far, I never undersatnd the use of the term reboot all the time. The comics constantly change artist teams after long runs and "refresh" the direction and story. I look at this as just another comic story line.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:58 a.m. CST
Great suggestion. Maybe a "best of both worlds" is the way to go. Maybe, like you said, he has web-producing glands somewhere on his body, and he then creates mechanical devices that both stimulate the glands and direct the webs as he wants. Now THAT I can get on board with. Again, great suggestion.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:58 a.m. CST
I have a friend what writes for a magazine, he once interviewed Stan Lee. He asked him what he liked better (organic vs.web shooter)and why. Lee said that he loved the idea of the organic shooters...he just didn't think of it himself. That James Cameron came up with the idea during his first attempt at a script and he spoke to Lee about it, hoping for his blessing. He said, Spider-man belongs to the world, do it well and I am fine with it. Also, my friend said that Stan Lee is the nicest man on the planet and loved to give interviews...when his assistant come on the line and said "Mr. Lee, you have another interview in 5 minutes." Lee replied...."I am talking to my new friend Tony...be with you in a minute."
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:59 a.m. CST
by D o o d
How about some news on the Golden Globes themselves. I really love that Ricky Gervais took all those obnoxiously highly paid actors, directors, producers and brought them back down to planet earth. Imagine that you're going to go to a ceremony that is going to pat you on your back but instead the host tells you you're a closet gay and that your film sucks! Gervais for President!
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:59 a.m. CST
for guys who are supposedly so hip, you're kind of behind the times in terms of technology. Everything is moving toward symbiotic organics with relation to a human body; the Borg thing is entirely obsolete. I think it's an issue with a certain generation that sees machines as external to themselves. Get over it.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11 a.m. CST
First of all, if he sells the formula for the webbing, he's outed himself as Spider-Man, no? And if he sells the webbing formula INSTEAD of becoming Spider-Man, he's a rich freak that sticks to walls. And moreover, who's gonna buy some ground-breaking chemical epoxy off of a high school kid? Would he use Uncle Ben and Aunt May as a beard? And if he was the kind of kid that was out to make an opportunistic buck, why wouldn't he have tracked down the spider that bit him, or bottled up some blood samples, or figured out the process in which a spider was able to transmit its mutant DNA to him and sell that shit to the Army? Then, he'd be the hero that transformed our armed forces into web-slinging supermen. And he'd be rich enough to buy a really hot prostitute and a red wig.</p><p> I'm cool with the "he invents spider webbing" idea because, as many others have pointed out, if he really developed spinarets from mutated spider DNA, he'd be shooting webs out of his ass, not conveniently from his wrists. Plus, IT WAS IN THE GODDAMN ORIGINAL COMIC BOOK. They pulled it off in the movies all right, but him running out of spider-goop during a critical brawl was like half the suspense in the comics. That, and his wisecracks, which, what few they allowed MacGuire to say in the movies, sounded like they were coming through an autistic Three Stooges fan who liked touching boys.</p><p> I'm a lot more worried about the other issues going on in the movie, like the totally gay Spider-man costume (flames on his arms?!? Is he planning on tearing ass around a stock car convention?!?), or the fact that Peter Parker now looks like one of those douchebags you see getting busted on "Campus P.D.", or that they still apparently can't convince an attractive actress to be in a SPIDER-MAN movie
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:03 a.m. CST
With all due respect I'm getting tired of editors here giving this new movie a pass just because they have released a photo and Andrew Garfield is a hot actor right now. Andrew Garfield is a fine actor. No doubt about it. I have no problem with the casting. But Raimi along with Tobey Maguire released 2 very good SM films that satisfied many (not all) fans and critics alike. SM3 was a misfire as we all know and I strongly believe that studio interference was what sunk that film with an overload of characters and villains. So they release a photo of Garfield is his Spider-Man costume? BFD! Did you expect it was going to look bad on a multi-million dollar production? This reboot is too soon and so unnecessary.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:13 a.m. CST
The organic web-spinners were a left over idea from James Cameron’s time on the 90’s Spider-Man movie project. Sam Raimi used the idea in his movie years later. Actually the full story was that Peter Parker grew glands on his wrists that shot webbing in such an unpredictable way that he had to make wrist attachments that controlled the direction/spread/speed/length ete,etc of the webbing. As I recall the wrist devices were made up of spent cigarette lighters and watchstraps early on and further developed into a neater design as his crime-fighting career went on. Raimi cut out the wrist strap element, in fairness though; who could be bothered explaining that overly complicated mess on film? Are you listening Sony? Sony? You’re not going to revisit that idea again are you? Sony? Sony? <p> Just have him with organic shooters or mechanical shooters like the comics. For gods sake don’t try Cameron’s weird mash-up idea. <p> Maybe in this reboot Parkers webs come out of his asshole and he has to poo webbing into little containers every morning that he then wears on his wrists that he can smell—sorry—use as webbing during the day! <p> A long as they have a cool Power Ranger designed villain like the Green Goblin from the first movie ill be happy. That was a truly inspired decision that sat well with fans 10 years ago!
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:26 a.m. CST
Perhaps not on par with Kirk vs. Picard or balrog wings, but still great. I vote organic, because it seems more elegant, but i understand the opposing viewpoint at least.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:28 a.m. CST
I belive some spider scientist did a report that said if Peter was bitten by a spider, he would likely shoot webbing out of a gland under his tongue, We can all be thankfull they'll never stick that into a movie... unless Fox gets the spider-man rights I never had a problem with the orgionaic webbing. Yeah it's not faithful to the comics, but honestly explaining that plot point in a movie would be so boring and it would leave the audience asking "why the hell doesn't he get rich of this stuff" I don't mind a mixture of both, you know organic webbing that's unstable so he needs a device to aim it or something
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:30 a.m. CST
by Amazing Maurice
some rejected Oscorp tech that Peter 'borrows' and adapts. He's pals with Harry Osborne after all. It would make a hell of a lot more sense than a kid INVENTING this kind of thing. Its pushing credibility that he could even make the fucking suit!
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:32 a.m. CST
...come out of his wrists and he doesn't turn out to be a spider-elemental.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:34 a.m. CST
Puberty and masturbation subtext..?? A teenager who is imbued with power (...with great responsibility..), verging on manhood.. Anyone?
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
That shit is disgusting. Stan Lee knew what he was doing. Fuck organics. They add nothing to the character.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:40 a.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
or Sandman would get laughed off the screen. Parker obviously can't sell his web formula because it would give away his identity as Spider-man.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:42 a.m. CST
Spun from the silk coming out of his pores, he grows it whenever his spider sense tingles and then sloughs it off later. What? That's not believable? That's ridiculous? Oh, sorry. Back to the reasoned and well grounded debate between organic and mechanical webs shooters.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:43 a.m. CST
I missed the mechanical webshooters in the Raimi films. It's a potential weakness that humanizes the protagonist, grounding him in reality. It is a sorely missing component in the movie franchise that I am sad to see so casually dismissed. I can get over it, and have, but it still reeks of lack of imagination. What a shame to see Nordling continue the tired trope of how "realistic" organic webshooters are. Yeah, so is DNA research. Ever consider that? Okay, so Peter isn't such a genius that he could invent a new cash cow for 3M. But, let's say his mutation is erratic and emanates useless, sticky spooge. This is where Peter's budding genius kicks in. He disassembles and reworks the guts of a lighter or spray can, making a gadget he wears on his wrist that directs and controls the useless flow from his wrists into a useful stream of webbing, compleat with nozzles to control the spread from a zip line to a wide net. This would be the best of both worlds. The origin of the webfluid is explained in a way that keeps Peter's intellect intact while not making one wonder why he wouldn't patent the technology as it is useful ONLY TO HE. Plus, these things could still be crushed by an enemy rendering Peter without webshooters. Well, useful ones at least. Heroes are defined by their weaknesses. This would make the character much more interesting as well as hewing much more closely to the source material. That can't be a bad thing.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:47 a.m. CST
---But, let's say his mutation is erratic and emanates useless, sticky spooge-- This um, mutation, you are talking about --its called puberty.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:55 a.m. CST
uses the wrist contraptions to shoot the webbing. So occasionally he'll have to stop in an alley and crap webbing into his shooters. Only takes a few minutes though.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST
Spider-Man has been around for generations. If they go device rather than organic, that's fine by me. If the suit doesn't look hand-made, that's fine by me. We've been around the webcrawler's block so many times, all I care about is a good solid movie with characters I can care about and an ending that has me leaving the theater saying "wow, that was awesome!"
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST
The strength al
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:03 p.m. CST
by Wyatt Elling
In the Ultimate version, which this project seems to be drawing from with the high school focus, Peter doesn't invent the web fluid. His parents were super-science cancer specialists who made the formula as part of a treatment mechanism. Peter Parker adapted into the web fluid, and an evil scientist later created the Venom symbiote from the base work of the Parkers. This is a better solution than organics.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:05 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
has no business calling themselves a "True believer". That ridiculous Raimi nonsense appears to have found it's way right where it belongs...on the trash heap.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:12 p.m. CST
Orga vs. Mecha
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:13 p.m. CST
You can clearly see the little devices on the inside of his wrists. They look gold or bronze-ish. http://s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/214/original/SpideyGarfieldBig.jpg?1294949568
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:21 p.m. CST
I never understood how one could get bit by a spider yet can't do one of the things that is most recognizable in spiders....webs! I hope the mechanical part refines his organics. Like a hose nozzle (spray, stream, etc.)
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:22 p.m. CST
I agree with tradition and the true character but... I never understood how one could get bit by a spider yet can't do one of the things that is most recognizable in spiders....webs! I hope the mechanical part refines his organics. Like a hose nozzle (spray, stream, etc.)
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:23 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
and I love the look of the costume thus far, without the dark silver heavy web lines (again, ala Raimi), and the fact that he actually looks like a skinny teenager and not some 30+ year old pretending to play a kid. Garfield's got exactly the body type Peter Parker needs for the film, I believe. If his mask has big white eyes, I'll be over the fucking moon on this rendition. *fingers crossed*
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:26 p.m. CST
Are you serious? This is a story about a kid who gets bitten by a radioactive spider and takes on its abilities and you're worried that his creation of web fluid is too unrealistic? Thank god they're giving the character something to DO than having it all handed to him by the spider. He'll DECIDE to create these things and put them on his wrists instead of the total convenience of organics that REALISTICALLY would shoot from a gland at his ass but were conveniently relocated to his wrists.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST
Here is my theory on why they decided to go with a Peter Parker made dveice instead of when they created Spider Man. "But spiders shoot webs from there But, should Spider man?" "No that would just be stupid" " and why in the world would a man who get the abilities of a Spider shoot webs from his wrist" Ya how could we explain that?" "maybe Little spiders live in his wrists and shoot webs from there buts out holes in his wrist?" I rest my case :P
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:38 p.m. CST
That if Peter Parker truly took on the characteristics of a spider, the web fluid would be shooting out of his ass, not his wrists. Kind of why I though the organic web shooter thing was dumb too.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:40 p.m. CST
by Peter David
It broke me up when fans totally flipped out over the concept of organic webshooters. How stupid! How ridiculous! How utterly unlike anything associated with Spider-Man! And I was off on the side going, "Ahem. Excuse me: Spider-Man 2099? Had organic webshooters from the get-go?" For that matter, he also stuck to walls through little curved projections from his fingers, just like--wait for it--Peter Parker did in the first Sam Raimi film. Basically they took all the stuff that no one had any problem with in "Spider-Man 2099," applied it to Peter Parker, and suddenly fans went haywire. I was never able to understand it. "Organic webshooters are so stupid!" No, you know what's stupid? Spider sense. There is nothing in the whole of nature that gives arachnids any sort of magical ESP that enables them to sense danger. But they can spin webs. The fact is that fans reacted that way because it's what they're used to. If Stan Lee had given Peter Parker organic webshooters, and Raimi had decided that organic was icky and Peter should make mechanical webshooters, the very same people decrying organic webshooters now would be screaming about mechanical ones. Plus I always hated the notion that Peter was this genius who could create, basically, the chemical solution for post-it notes, not to mention an elaborate firing mechanism, but apparently being able to build in a simple fuel gauge was beyond his capabilities. Einstein said that the definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result. The first time Spider-Man ran out en route, he should have said, "Dumb-ass! I need to add a gas gauge so THAT doesn't happen again." Instead it became a crutch by writers to introduce artificial danger. Not to mention that his spider sense could warn him of a sniper who had him targeted from ten blocks away, but it was unable to give him a heads-up that he was about to plummet eighty stories because he had no more webshots left. Indeed, at one spider-writers meeting back when I was writing Spec Spidey, I advocated the notion of Peter adding a buzzer or a level indicator or a bell or SOMEthing to tip him off that he needed to change cartridges. And I was told by one of the senior writers that that was a terrible idea. Why? "Because then he could never run out of web fluid at the worst possible moment!" Right. Why use common sense when bad writing choices can carry the day. The fact is that, from both a storytelling and origin point of view, organic webshooters are simpler and less prone to lapses in logic and common sense. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:41 p.m. CST
by Bald Evil
I always thought it would make sense if Peter did invent the web-shooters, but had to use his own blood as a catalyst for the webbing. That would explain why he didn't try to market the webbing, since it would really only work for him. And he probably wouldn't want anyone trying to synthesize his blood, or worse, turn him into a captive test subject.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:42 p.m. CST
by Yotz Von Frelnik
That was my impression of studio interference for the day.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:55 p.m. CST
Spidey was created with Parker making his own shooters. Illogical? Your kidding, right? This is a friggin Marvel COMIC from the 60's were talking here. If I want to see a realistic SpiderMan I'll go to the play and watch him crash to the floor when his prop fails.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:56 p.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
He not only had physical abilities but he also had pre-cog and used webbing technology. Both interesting interpretations for what spiders do.
Jan. 18, 2011, 12:58 p.m. CST
The people these movies are really made for don't give a rat's ass how he makes webs and will only be confused by a change like this. Just leave them alone and don't complicate the world for the tiny brained folk. There's no "raging debate" about this. Most of the geeks don't even give a shit about this.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:04 p.m. CST
by Darth Macchio
...that even lasting 1 hour, at the apparent instant grip-ability the webbing does have, would invariably net Parker the Nobel prize, if not a nomination should he publish, yes? An instant contact super-bond that lasts only one hour isn't a glue "no one wants" it's a chemical compound with unlimited uses by scientists of almost every stripe. Who gives a shit if some doofus has no use for it in the home? Also, and not to belabor a point, Otto would have also likely have gotten the Nobel in the field of robotics for the mechanical arms he created. Even if he failed in creating self-sustained fusion reactions. I like that the comic had him try the obvious, selling his invention but the reasons were rather glib as to why this didn't work (did he go to a regular guy at a drug store or a chemical plant? there's no way any R&D firm wouldn't buy the webbing given it's uses - and that's with or without the 1 hour duration - it could even be a better reason as it's application becomes very specific - think stitches that dissolve under the skin, etc.). I've never read those comics in particular and can suspend my disbelief tho, at the risk of committing comic book blasphemy, I do prefer organic web-shooters. But they should definitely play up Parker's brilliance more - in Raimi's films, he seems to basically be a post-nerd jock and I don't believe the comics ever portrayed him as such.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:05 p.m. CST
so PP is this super genius school-boy who makes this super-glue and instead of becoming both insanely rich AND SM,two properties who would allowed him to help the world in the most beneficial way possible,instead he decides to abandon his physics degree and turn into a loser photographer who works for pennies and gets insulted by his fascist boss while his closest friends and relatives keep dying around him. good call PP,no wonder Batman/Bruce Wayne is more popular than you and in some extend even Tony Stark/Iron Man nowadays.you should take a hint from those guys bug-boy with your retarded mechanical web-shooters....
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:07 p.m. CST
Let's get back to the basics. Plus in the comics it was one peter's reasons for needing money, it sort of added to all the drama in his life. Plus running out during a fight makes for great moments IMO
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:12 p.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:12 p.m. CST
who uses the command line instead of the GUI.sigh..if our primitive ancestors were thinking like that they would have never invented the wheel. "True Cavemen" walk,they dont use wheels...
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:13 p.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:14 p.m. CST
in the comics,but i am sure it will be completely stupid since we are talking about mainstream S-H comics.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:16 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
Answer me this, those you who were born in the fucking 90s and keep asking for this organic horseshit. What did Stan Lee and Steve Ditko write and fucking draw? Who should we look to? Raimi or the guys that actually created Your Friendly Neghborhood Spider-Man? End of discussion. P.S. Fucking kids. Get off my lawn.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:19 p.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:20 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
"One of the first things I did was to work up a costume. A vital, visual part of the character. I had to know how he looked ... before I did any breakdowns. For example: A clinging power so he wouldn't have hard shoes or boots, a hidden wrist-shooter versus a web gun and holster, etc. ..." -Steve Ditko, 2000
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:20 p.m. CST
Never thought of that before (and maybe neither did Stan) but it makes perfect sense. And almost every super-villain could get rich off their powers in better ways than robbing banks but then it wouldn't be much fun would it?
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:38 p.m. CST
Was the real Peter David? And if so why isn't anyone one saying anything about it?
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:45 p.m. CST
HOW THE FUCK IS HIS ID BLOWN???? i make a formula for a super glue.i keep the formula a well-guarded secret and i make my own company which produces and sells the glue for use in whatever applications. i get insanely rich which allows me to have the free time and the supporting assets (technology,money,secret hideouts,connections,hell you can even buy Daily Bungle to get the news directly in your office) to go out in the nights and fight crime as SM. you know like Batman and IM do. now the super glue is accessible to everyone in the market,it's used from the military to the house-keeping.which means that everyone can dress as spider-man,make his own mechanical shooters and try to become SM. but are the web shooters the only thing that defines the real SM? NO. PP is the only one who posses the powers of the spider,spider-sense,super-strength,dexterity,stamina,resilience,flexibility,super acrobatic skills. it's all the above sum that makes SM a real super-hero,a masked vigilante with super-powers. Do the world know that PP posses these powers? NO. they only know that some guy has super-powers and also uses the super-glue from PP's company to fight crime. So how exactly is PP's secret ID blown? the only known fact about him is that his glue is used by a masked freak with super-powers to fight crime and that's it. Now you could say that a smart guy with detective skills might dig a bit and eventually come to the conclusion that PP is SM. but guess what,this has happened with Batman/BW,this should have happened with Superman/Clark Kent but obviously Lois Lane is too fucking stupid to notice it,this has happened to a lot of other super-heroes and this has also happened to the loser photographer PP in the comics where his loved ones keep getting killed around him. talk about keeping his secret ID secret.... but then again we are talking about mainstream funny books with pew pew heroes...which make common sense irrelevant
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:47 p.m. CST
always got the idea you needed spider strength to control them. Remember one issue when a guy found one and was messing around with it and couldn't budge the trigger. He took a hammer to it and it blasted him to the wall. Chemical under too much pressure. It's a fucking comic. Can you not suspend belief?
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:48 p.m. CST
Spider-Man was the only hero I ever remember washing and sewing his tights. It was one of those things that emphazied him as a "working class hero." It was also one of the reasons that the black Spidey suit was such a big deal back in the day, before we knew it was an angsty, brain eating symbiote. He had finally gotten a "big boy" uniform, like the FF and the Avengers.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:49 p.m. CST
he is a frequent talkbacker.and he is 100% right in his post about the organic/mechanical shooters.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:50 p.m. CST
I must agree completely with Mr. David. Bad writing especially on Spec Spider-man was epidemic. look at Todd Dizigo (spelling???)
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:51 p.m. CST
Nice to see you still have it, Peter.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:56 p.m. CST
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:58 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
Sorry to burst your bubble, PAD. But there's a reason that the gent who told you that was a senior writer. I still love your work.
Jan. 18, 2011, 1:59 p.m. CST
Maybe he could do it... he'd have to put the product on the market for a while, transforming the world so everyone can access his product - then become Spider-Man. If he does it the other way around - as he needs to in the comics - it's going to look pretty suspicious that this miracle invention is the same stuff ONLY this costumed vigilante has been using so far. Lee & Ditko wrote that he invented the web-shooters to further his showbiz Spider-Man persona - that was going to make him pretty rich probably. But then his Uncle is killed and he decides to fight crime instead. It's a little too late to sell his web-fluid formula, even if they did have him try to do that in the comics once.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:07 p.m. CST
Well, I'll be fine either way really, but still... Rather than his web fluid be a secretion (gross) or a completely unrelated invention (convenient), I'd accept that he unlocked the key to creating the webbing formula while studying what had happened to him. Hell, maybe, like in the first film, there was already a project underway that involved spiders and a desire to make spider-silk that would have functionality in manufacturing kevlar and such (as is actually being studied in real life). Peter finds that certain amino acids in him bridge the gap in the artificial formula, allowing him to create the web formula. That way it all ties into the bite, but doesn't make it super-semen coming from his wrists. And if the solution to the formula is kind of coded into him, that would likely make him reluctant to sell it to someone.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:08 p.m. CST
a more realistic take would mean spiderman would look like one of those idiots at comic conventions all dressed up. YOU DO NOT WANT A MORE REALISTIC FUCKING TAKE.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:18 p.m. CST
by Nico Toscani
Peter is a science nerd. He makes his web shooters himself. That organic bullshit is one of many reasons I hated the Raimi movies.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:21 p.m. CST
...I always liked that in "The Last Avengers Story" Peter had retired and sold his webbing formula to 3M. You know, for as unrelentingly dark and tragic as that story was, it still gave me more satisfying deaths to classic characters than the countless ones that Marvel has churned out over the last decade. That was a dark and twisted end to the Vision and Wanda romance especially, but at least it had some emotion behind it. Thanks for that, Mr. David.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:31 p.m. CST
Or whosever idea it was originally.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:32 p.m. CST
....even in the comics and cartoons. If peter parker has spider like abilllities, then it should only be natural for him to produce webbing from his body like ,you know, a spider. To me, spider-man having mechanical web shooters is like the flash having a really fast car, or the hulk having a pair of bionic gloves that give him superhuman punching power. The webshooters are weapons that give spider-man abillities that he should really already have. The webshooters being in the movie to help spider-man shoot organic webbing more acurately, would make way more sense than peter creating home made web fluid with a chemistry set .
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:41 p.m. CST
"AND if he's so super amazing and smart, WHY THE HELL in nearly 50 years has he never ONCE built in an early warning alarm, letting him know when he's running low? He can create a super-epoxy, but can't make a little beep or a light? What the hell... I don't mean to crap all over this, I'm a HUGE spidey fan," Huge Spidey fan? Hah! Well I'm surprised you didn't know then that Peter did actually invent a warning light in Amazing Spiderman #297 to show him when his web shooters were about to run out. (As well as changing the material they were made of so they wouldn't trip metal detectors at airports, and installing a firing mechanism for launching his Spider tracers..) The Issue in question was written by David Micheline, and given what Peter David mentions in this very talkback, it makes me wonder if he took Mr David up on that as with it being back in 1988, that would have been around the time Mr David was doing some of his early work on the Spider titles. So he did once invent one-flipping 22 years ago! OWNED! Just kidding dude. Only reason I remember is that not only was it a rare issue where Spiderman is so happy he's doing somersaults of joy at the start, but I too as a kid remember reading this issue thinking 'why didn't he invent this years ago?' LOL! Personally I'm not that fussed what they are in the movie, though I suppose it'll be a nice change to have the mechanical. Since this might mean then that we actually get a smart Peter Parker this time. Instead of the slow witted, moronic, cowardly, shuffling, retarded imbecile that Maguire and Raimi re-invented him as! Soooo glad that role's been recast. I hope Sam Raimi never get's near another Spiderman film in his life, if that's what his idea is of what Spiderman's supposed to be like..(Her's a clue Raimi..The guy's supposed to be witty. i.e We laugh WITH him as he takes the pi$$ out of his silly villians, NOT at him, as he becomes ever more pathetic with each film!)
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:44 p.m. CST
He's been on here before. I've noticed him on a few talkbacks that aren't even comic related, so I guess this must be one of his semi-regular stops on the Web.. (Although I'm amazed he still comes here, with how nasty some of these talkbacks get..)
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:45 p.m. CST
I don't give a flying ballsbag whether he made mechanical spooge-firers in the comics. It is patently fucking RIDICULOUS that Lee didn't give SPIDERman the ability to organically create SPIDER silk from the get-go. It makes total, complete, logical sense that a dude whose superpowers are derived from a SPIDER, a creature whose defining characteristic is its ability to spin incredibly strong, sticky thread, would be able to organically make the stuff himself. What part of that do you mewling little ponies not get? Why on earth would it be MORE plausible for a geeky kid to create a world-changing, super-strong compound from scratch, never mind the ability to store and fire it? Jesus. Interacting with comic book geeks is like repeatedly punching your own balls.
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:50 p.m. CST
"I understand he is a "genuis", but I never realized that mechanical engineering was his strong suit" Some recent writers have been starting to address this with the current writer even having him have a fairly prestigious job where he's been inventing all sorts of gizmo's and outfit's. (His latest even has a stealth mode that turn's him invisible!) I think the long held attitude has always been, that's he's either unable or unwilling to hold down a steady job, as his superhero exploits always seem to take priority.. The implication's always seemingly been that if he retired and concentrated on building a scientific career, he maybe could give the Starks and Pyms of the Marvel universe a run for their money..
Jan. 18, 2011, 2:57 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
Mechanical web shooters have always been an integral part of the character of Peter Parker, as it develops a further bond between the fact that this is not your typical super hero. He had many of the abilities of a spider because of the bite, but ANYONE could have been bitten. This particular hero had the talent to create the shooters because the kid is a fucking genius. That's Peter Parker inside that suit, and not just some Joe Six Pack who can shoot webbing from his wrists through some holes. If that's the case, why would it even matter that Peter Parker is the character? What makes him special? Why is he different? It's never been solely about Spider-Man, this is Peter Parker's story. You just don't fucking get it, and that's fine...neither did Raimi.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:01 p.m. CST
by Peter David
I think my logic was pretty much irrefutable, and a simple "he's right, you're wrong" is going to do much to change my mind in that regard. I should mention that the same senior writer, when I wanted to do a story creating a son for the Hulk, contended that Marvel would never run such a story because no Marvel hero other than Reed and Sue Richards would ever have an offspring. I like being ahead of the curve. As to the rest of you, thanks for the kind words. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:08 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
The Spidey 2099 argument does not apply here. Until they make that film, that's not Miguel O'Hara inside that costume. As I just explained a couple of posts above this, it's Peter Parker. And mechanical shooters are part of who our favorite Webhead is. Giving this kid genius organic webs may enhance Spidey is some folks' eyes, but it is absolutely demeaning to the character of Peter Parker.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:08 p.m. CST
so if he is so genius,wtf he is not rich? contradiction.NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:14 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
Is that the measure of a man? His wealth? Not only would Peter disagree, so would his Uncle Ben. If you knew anything about the Spider-Man mythology, you'd know that he originally envisioned great wealth coming with great power. It took the loss of his uncle because of his own greed and carelessness to show him the error of his ways. The measure of a man is not the size of his bank account or his fucking car, you ignorant little twit.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:20 p.m. CST
if they actually tied this spider-man series to the main marvel film universe. it's believable in that universe coz everything's over the top sci-fi craziness with men turning into orange rock and shapeshifters and alien beings and women controlling the weather, people teleporting etc. since raimi's films featured spidey as the only superhero in the world (correct me if i'm wrong) and the supervillains were all the results of 'industrial accidents' and the like, i was actually okay with organic shooters at the time. not the preferred of course but it was certainly least bad/wrong thing with raimi's 'vision' anyway.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:22 p.m. CST
What a random bunch of characters. So Mystique and Emma Frost are as old as Charles Xavier and Magneto? Beast has an afro? At least Emma has some nice assets. Apparently 60's bra technology was more advanced in the X-men universe.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:25 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
and not some extras from the Matrix Reloaded set. Costume design gets a thumbs up from me, let's see what Vaughn has planned for the story side of things. It can't possibly be any worse than what Fox did to Logan in Origins.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:28 p.m. CST
So it has that going for it, which is nice.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:31 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
As much as Raimi has pissed all over the history and development of Spidey, nowhere in those films was it ever stated or established that there were not others with powers (be it mutant or otherwise) anywhere else on the planet. That would take scope...Raimi's films have none of that. So, let me see if I understand your other point. This young man secreting organic spider webbing from his wrists at a very high velocity seems perfectly reasonable to you, but building a device that could do such a thing, like, oh I don't know, a fucking GUN, doesn't? Quite the leap, jamf. Were you a screenwriter on Spider-Man 3?
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:34 p.m. CST
I just want to see the porno version where he shoots his webbing in gwen staceys mouth!!! lol
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:41 p.m. CST
The webshooters thing never worked for me for some of the reasons mentioned by Nordling. However, I think it makes perfect sense for Peter to create some sort of device on the suit to harness the power of his webs. Plus, other than the people that will never be happy with anything, this idea should make everyone content - it's the perfect compromise that covers both fandoms... and actually makes logical sense at the same time.
Jan. 18, 2011, 3:54 p.m. CST
I don't recognize a single person attached to this film.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:13 p.m. CST
Does Marvel own this property or does Sony still own it?
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:16 p.m. CST
...organic webbing as a concept. I think it's pretty cool actually. And if those more in favor of them could just say "I think they're cooler", and leave it at that, so could I. But this ridiculous pretense that in a story about a teenager who gains super-human powers from a genetically altered spider bite, suits up in red and blue long underwear and dedicates himself to fighting flying goblins eight limbed mad scientists and sand creatures that MECH WEBSHOOTERS is the tipping point for suspension of disbelief???!!!.....Please people, save it.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:23 p.m. CST
Comics and movies are two different mediums. An exact, literal translation from comic to screen would not necessarily work. You only have 2 hours or so to set everything up and tell a story. Having Parker develop an organic webshooter as a result of being bitten by a genetically altered "super-spider" is a perfect compromise and lets us get on with the story. Wasn't one of the characteristics of the super-spider a stronger webbing and spider-sense? Saying that Raimi's movies suck because Parker didn't invent a web-shooter or Spider-Man doesn't crack enough jokes is pretty weak. Fact is, lots of people enjoyed his movies just fine - fan and non-fan alike. I think Raimi did a great service to the Spider-Man franchise and the new director has some big shoes to fill. Hard-core fanboys like 'peter franks' will never be satisfied. I expect lots of complaints from him and his ilk once the new movie lands.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:27 p.m. CST
"he'd have to put the product on the market for a while, transforming the world so everyone can access his product - then become Spider-Man. If he does it the other way around - as he needs to in the comics - it's going to look pretty suspicious that this miracle invention is the same stuff ONLY this costumed vigilante has been using so far. Lee & Ditko wrote that he invented the web-shooters to further his showbiz Spider-Man persona - that was going to make him pretty rich probably. But then his Uncle is killed and he decides to fight crime instead. It's a little too late to sell his web-fluid formula, even if they did have him try to do that in the comics once. " suspicion is something that can be applied to every super-hero.Superman and Batman are the most obvious example of that. but regardless of that,you say it's too late to sell his formula.first of all,i am talking about selling the web-fluid as a product and not selling the formula of how to make it. there's a big difference between two things. Secondly: why selling the fluid after the introduction of SM to the world, would expose his secret identity? there are plenty of examples after the industrial revolution and even now,where world-changing discoveries and inventions were made by brilliant people but their commercial use and success was possible because of the visions and business ideas of other brilliant people. Do you think that Henry Ford was the inventor of car,because he made a factory selling cars? nope The same applies with PP and SM,which means that the explanation that the comic writers gave in the comic to explain this hole of logic in SM's origin is ,as it is expected,RIDICULOUS.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:47 p.m. CST
Rodie, can you please elaborate on why you think Spider-Man doesn't qualify as superhuman? He can climb walls. He can sense danger even when it's not within his field of vision (i.e., "Spidey sense"). He has superhuman strength. The idea that the radioactive spider bite didn't make him superhuman demonstrates a complete lack of knowledge about the character.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:47 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
kept Marvel and Spider-Man afloat through the lean years with annual subscriptions and merchandise sales. Long before Spidey was cool to you, your hipster buddies and your mom. Speaking of your mom, her Spider-sense was tingling last night. And by her "Spider-sense" I mean her achingly swollen clit.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:52 p.m. CST
i know that my english are not that good,but you missed entirely my point which i am trying to make.let me clarify something: i am NOT talking about PP measuring his dick,comprende? about your post: "Is that the measure of a man? His wealth? Not only would Peter disagree, so would his Uncle Ben. If you knew anything about the Spider-Man mythology, you'd know that he originally envisioned great wealth coming with great power. It took the loss of his uncle because of his own greed and carelessness to show him the error of his ways. The measure of a man is not the size of his bank account or his fucking car, you ignorant little twit. " soooo if i understood you correctly Uncle Ben's ideology was that being rich makes you automatically bad,greedy and irresponsible. that Ben's advice to PP was not to be always responsible,especially if he happened to be in a position of holding great power either it was about wealth,political status,having super-powers,etc or simply being the strongest person in the school class.. no instead Ben's advice to PP was he should never try to become rich because he would automatically turn out bad and the people would think that he only wants to measure his dick.righ. and you are supposed to be a SM fan and know his mythology? dont make me laugh.NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:54 p.m. CST
would be nanite webbing that literally flies through the air to its target because it's made of little flying robots. There is no believable way to shoot a cable without high pressure combustion of some sort. We have a half inch cable made of that super fiber that will lift 30 cars or whatever but getting it to a target would require giant compressed gas tanks or something. If they can write that this punk kid makes any of this shit- then it's retarded. Oh yeah. The comic is retarded and the Science of spiderman show showed that organic web slingers are impossible too because he'd have arms like pop-eye to house the extra weird anus muscles needed to squirt webs. All of you lose. Also swinging is played out. Seen it. What else ya got. Other heroes can fucking fly anywhere they want to
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:56 p.m. CST
huge sacks of spider-eggs,which burst and thousands of tiny flesh-eating spiders come out and eat the villains alive.yummy.
Jan. 18, 2011, 4:59 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
That indecipherable, incoherent mishmash of drivel? Christ, I understand that you're not a native English speaker, but at least try to complete sentences to some form of coherent thought. Hold on a sec...are you Sarah Palin? It all makes sense now.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:08 p.m. CST
what matters is that your supposed argument was an epic fail and clearly showcased your lack of understanding of wtf Uncle Ben was talking about. hardcore fanboy my ass.NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:24 p.m. CST
Parker never fulfils his potential because of all them super-villains. Keeping him as a high-school kid, which Marvel maybe should have done, at least gives you the idea that he could grow up to be a Tony Stark ONE DAY... making him a 25ish photographer cements he has wasted his opportunities, but just because he can whip up a web-shooter doesn't mean he could be Steve Jobs, or that he would pursue the avenue of selling his web-fluid to anyone. As I said, almost all super-heroes and super-villains could make themselves rich from their powers (but don't), like people in horror movies shouldn't split up and/or investigate the cellar, and movie cops should generally wait for back-up. It's a genre thing. Personally the organic web-shooters in the Raimi movies, which I liked apart from the last, didn't bother me. But the idea that Peter Parker couldn't invent aerosol plus webby-super-glue, then not go off and try and sell his product are not big problems. And logically it would endanger his secret identity, in ways I previously pointed out above which I don't think killik has successfully refuted. One thing I didn't like, which has been touched upon, is that he shouldn't be able to survive huge falls. It kind of ruins the excitement of his death-defying web-swinging if he can fall 20 stories and just get up rubbing his head.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:24 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
And while I do find the second film somewhat entertaining, Raimi's overall understanding not only of Spidey, but more importantly of Peter Parker is wholly lacking. The greater issue is respect of the books and the history that's been created over nearly a half century. Raimi showed his lack of respect for the characters repeatedly, not just in his handling of Peter, but also with that fucking Power Ranger suit he threw Gobby into, and let's not even get started on Peter and the entire Venom subplot of part 3.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:25 p.m. CST
Webbing comes from Spinneret at the base of Spiders Abdomen, not his anus, not his urethra. Can any Pro Organic, please explain IN THE CONTEXT OF HUMAN BIOLOGY how webbing could and would shoot out of Spider-man's wrist.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:28 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
I still own all three Raimi films on blu-ray. Because I'm such a fan of the character and in spite of the films. Christ, I've got both of Story's F4 flicks up on the shelf as well. Yes, I am Marvel's bitch and I have been since I was five.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:29 p.m. CST
Seems that some of the Raimi haters bring up the organic webshooters as an example. And peter franks, you are one sad little specimen. I'd love to discuss this with you to your face.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:37 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
Are you going to beat me up, mapman? That's so cute. Or do you want to give me a big, wet kiss? I'm guessing the latter based on your closeted tough guy persona.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:38 p.m. CST
At least one species of Spider (Aphonopelma seemanni) has spinnerets on its feet/legs. Human hands are, bascially, evolved feet. So, given the differences between human and arachnid biology, there's no reason they wouldn't be on or near the hands in a human.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:41 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
And absolutely plausible IF Spidey had been given organic webbing by his CREATORS. Unfortunately, that's not the case as this entire discussion and debate is solely because of the whims of Raimi and the empty suits at Sony.
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:53 p.m. CST
funny i thought it was because of the supposed "hardcore fanboys" who whine like little kids whose candy was stolen,because they are so insanely attached to what they consider "established mythology".
Jan. 18, 2011, 5:56 p.m. CST
in that case it is also retarded that the muscles of a thin fitness boy are enough to help him lift and throw a car.or have a mysterious spider-sense.really is this supposed to be an argument?
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:04 p.m. CST
I tried looking up his mentioned species But in all honestly I cant see someone making that up. I had no Problem with Organic shooters just the plausibility till now. Thanks man Now someone defend that last movie, good luck with that.
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:16 p.m. CST
i agree being genius doesnt not make you rich.you must be cunning for that.BUT: "Parker never fulfils his potential because of all them super-villains. Keeping him as a high-school kid, which Marvel maybe should have done, at least gives you the idea that he could grow up to be a Tony Stark ONE DAY... making him a 25ish photographer cements he has wasted his opportunities, but just because he can whip up a web-shooter doesn't mean he could be Steve Jobs, or that he would pursue the avenue of selling his web-fluid to anyone. trust me,when you make this kind of super-glue you must be completely retard not to become rich by exploiting it. "As I said, almost all super-heroes and super-villains could make themselves rich from their powers (but don't), like people in horror movies shouldn't split up and/or investigate the cellar, and movie cops should generally wait for back-up. It's a genre thing. Personally the organic web-shooters in the Raimi movies, which I liked apart from the last, didn't bother me." yet again you ignore the same thing.PP as a SCIENTIST created something which can be used for the benefit of both his and the world's.that is what he sells.NOT his super-powers.He tried to use his real super-powers to get rich and we know what happened. But making a scientific discover as a human being is entirely different than having super-powers.they are completely different situations which demand different approach. Dont confuse PP's manufactured super-glue with Tony Stark's IM technology or Cap's super-soldier-serum.It's not because of the super-glue that PP needs to be responsible,its because of his friggin super powers. Oh and btw,what about Mr Fantastic.he is rich,he sells his technology for profit and for the common good,he has a family and he doesnt have a secret ID.talk about huge contradiction there in the same universe... "But the idea that Peter Parker couldn't invent aerosol plus webby-super-glue, then not go off and try and sell his product are not big problems. And logically it would endanger his secret identity, in ways I previously pointed out above which I don't think killik has successfully refuted. One thing I didn't like, which has been touched upon, is that he shouldn't be able to survive huge falls. It kind of ruins the excitement of his death-defying web-swinging if he can fall 20 stories and just get up rubbing his head. " "has successfully refuted" oh so HUMAN HISTORY lies? ok. Henry Ford is the inventor of cars because he sold cars after they were invented.Bill Gates created the GUI.right.NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:19 p.m. CST
All of Spider-man's Abilities have been explains sufficiently, Spiders as most Insect and Arachnids have strengths exponentially greater then there own weight. till now organic web shooter s were the only thing that could not be explained as lazy, or convenient plot devicing.
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:23 p.m. CST
http://tinyurl.com/6xg4pev BTW, I'm neither pro or anti-organic webshooter. I can see the wisdom in each. I will admit, however, that of all the sins visited upon comic book movies over the years (from "the Super-amnesia kiss" to "Catwoman was brought back to life by being bitten by alley cats" to "Sandman is the real killer of Uncle Ben"), this one seems relatively minor.l
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:31 p.m. CST
I am liking the blond hair. Verrrrry nice. I hope she plays Gwen like Gwen: sweet, not sassy like most of the characters she plays. Gwen wasn't like that.
Jan. 18, 2011, 6:55 p.m. CST
but we have to worry that people won't beleive this same kid could invent web-shooters.
Jan. 18, 2011, 7 p.m. CST
of the insects has to do with their size not their dna.it's because they are so tiny that they can be so strong,otherwise if they had the size of a human in the way that they are biologically built,they wouldnt be able to even support their own way. Since you talked about "IN THE CONTEXT OF HUMAN BIOLOGY" that means that PP in order to become 10x stronger he must either: 1.become tiny as a spider 2.increase his muscular mass 3.use magic in case the above dont work i believe no3 is the correct way to achieve this.oh wait no,its fucking no2 if we apply a bit of common sense. But what the crazy hardcore fanboys do? they criticize organic web as being anatomically illogical because it's shot from PP's wrists and not his ass like spiders do,whereas in the more absurd case of PP being super-strong without the slightest biological explanation for that,they deliberately ignore the irrationality of that and they simply reply: "oh spiders are stronger than their weight,thus PP is stronger than his weight" but they forgot to explain how exactly do spiders achieve that? well i guess spiders come from Krypton and use solar energy to be that strong.NEXT goddamit NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 7:20 p.m. CST
Peter Parker goes to patent or sell his webbing, whatever. This is after he tried the show-biz route to wealth, but decided to fight crime instead. Person in charge of patents/anyone involved in the business side says 'hey this is like that stuff that the masked menace Spider-Man I read about in the Daily Bugle uses, I'm calling the cops.' ID blown.
Jan. 18, 2011, 7:22 p.m. CST
WHO GIVES A SHIT!
Jan. 18, 2011, 7:32 p.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
Do they show a parallel between human ingenuity (technology) and nature's ingenuity (a spiders webbing) the way mechanical webshooters do? Fuck no, they don't offer shit but bland, over-simplification.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:20 p.m. CST
Nordling, you have been coming through! Interesting stuff man, I like your style!
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:22 p.m. CST
could he still stick to the wall?
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:23 p.m. CST
I think they're calling it Hero Corp.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:25 p.m. CST
She would like you to refer to her as the 'rain queen' from now on.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:32 p.m. CST
You whole argument was that since nothing makes sense in Spider-man's Universe that Organic Webshooters don't have to. Thats a lazy argument and one that doesn't hold weight seeing as how there have been explanations to his strengths, and agility. I simply asked for a plausible explanation as to why web shooters would come out his wrist, I have one. Theres no reason for you to even argue your point I agree, feel free to find something else to be contrary about, but like I said your point has been proven for you, and better.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:35 p.m. CST
"Spinnerets from the base of the Abdomen" You illiterate prick.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:37 p.m. CST
Peter Parker goes to patent or sell his webbing, whatever. This is after he tried the show-biz route to wealth, but decided to fight crime instead. Person in charge of patents/anyone involved in the business side says 'hey this is like that stuff that the masked menace Spider-Man I read about in the Daily Bugle uses, I'm calling the cops.' ID blown. so when he creates this super-glue,he goes to fight crime instead of getting rich.let's assume that he is retard enough to do this stupid thing.let's assume that the patent guy is so bored that has nothing else to do than be a detective.lets say that he calls the cops.then: Cop: mr Parker we need to ask you some questions.you created this super-glue which have similar properties to the web that the vigilante superhero known as SM uses.it happens that you put this glue in the market after the appearance of this outlaw. PP: do you have a warrant? Cop: no you see,we came here because of the hunch of a bored patent clerk.we dont even know if we are talking about the same stuff because SM's web evaporates after 60m and we dont have enough time to examine it and compare it with your glue which also happens to evaporate in 60m. PP:so you are here because of an unstained speculation? Cop: that's correct. PP:i dont have to answer to anything.goodbye. SOLVED.NEXT.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:40 p.m. CST
If being bitten by a spider gives parker intuitive knowledge of making sticky webbing, then given that spiders as masters of designing and spinning and stitching webs of amazing intricacy, wouldn't that also lend itself to helping Parker stitch an amazing quality costume? Parker gains in addition to the knowledge of making webbing a knowledge of intricate stitching. He borrows visits Aunt May's Fabric Land store and buys supplies 'for her' because she likes to knit and stuff and no one's the wiser... and if anyone becomes suspicious of Parker, he can just pretend to be a sci-fi anime nerd who likes to cosplay. There, problem solved... Where's my cheque Sony? Well... I'll settle for a free copy of Killzone 3.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:41 p.m. CST
okey dokey chief.haha.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:44 p.m. CST
Has just announced his private security company Glimmer Securities will be making its IPO later this week. Glimmer Securities, a multi-million dollar organization, has often taken criticism from super-heroes still working in the public sector. They argue that only the rich benefit from Mister Rasputins services because they are too expensively for the average citizen. Mister Rasputin's response: 'By the white wolf...tell the lazy bums to get a second job. We're not running a charity here.'
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:46 p.m. CST
by Peter David
"The Spidey 2099 argument does not apply here. Until they make that film, that's not Miguel O'Hara inside that costume." Irrelevant. My point, which I thought was quite clear, was that fans attacked the very concept of organic webshooters as being absurd, disgusting and icky. And what I pointed out was that, when I introduced the concept, people had no problem with it. There was no ick factor; people just accepted it as part of the character. "As I just explained a couple of posts above this, it's Peter Parker. And mechanical shooters are part of who our favorite Webhead is." No. They're not. Part of what makes Spider-Man identifiable as Spider-Man is that he shoots webs. The mechanism by which he does so is irrelevant. The character in the film is identifiably Spider-Man, just as--during the period of time in the comic when he developed organic webshooters--he didn't cease being Spider-Man. Mechanical webshooters are just a means to an end. Again, it's simply what you're used to: If he had started out with organic webshooters and the movie made them mechanical, you'd be protesting just as loudly. "Raimi showed his lack of respect for the characters repeatedly..." First of all, I don't think that anyone who makes vile remarks about someone's mother's clit gets to make accusations about other people's lack of respect. Second, as opposed to the respect shown Spider-Man when he was a cartoon character rooming with Firestorm and Iceman? Or when he was teaching kids to read on "Electric Company?" Or during the original live action TV series when Peter Parker was cast at least ten years too old and was saddled with truly ghastly writing? Please. Raimi got way more right than he did wrong, and his love for Spider-Man was evident in every frame of the first two movies (the third was admittedly problematic.) I had to grow up watching Marvel movies in which Thor was simply a Viking warrior rather than a god (chatting with Don Blake, no less) and Daredevil had no horns on his mask and wore a blindfold because, hey, he was blind. So I think you and I have a very different definition of what constitutes treating characters with proper respect. Furthermore, it could be argued that organic webshooters bring Peter Parker to what he was always supposed to be: an everyman. A poor, downtrodden guy who was kicked around by bullies. A bright kid who was disdained because of his intelligence. All of these are things that give him a great deal in common with a great many people. But the moment he's creating web shooters, inventing things that don't exist, it catapults him to a whole new level. Suddenly he's less a put-upon everyman than he is a super-genius. How is someone with this level of inventive brilliance ever stuck for money? He should be getting a full ride at MIT and have tech companies lining up for his services. We suspend disbelief in the absurdity of it because Peter works better as a character when he's struggling, and because most of the first generation of readers were ten years old, so we didn't think about it too much. "And absolutely plausible IF Spidey had been given organic webbing by his CREATORS." Okay, first of all: Being bitten by a radioactive spider and getting superpowers from it rather than (a) a rash or (b) leukemia, is not plausible no matter how you slice it. Second: Stan Lee has no problem with it. I know because I asked him once. So if Stan is cool with it, and you're not, then your protests become less about fealty to the creator's views and more about your own obsessions. "Person in charge of patents/anyone involved in the business side says 'hey this is like that stuff that the masked menace Spider-Man I read about in the Daily Bugle uses, I'm calling the cops.' ID blown." Yeah, that's a poser. I had to put on my thinking cap for a whole five seconds before I figured that one out: "Parker! What's your connection to Spider-Man!" "The guy saved my butt from a mugger, and I took pictures of it when he did. I wound up selling the pictures to the Bugle and then split the money with him out of gratitude. We wound up becoming friends after that, although I have no idea who the guy is. And I came up with the idea of web shooters as a potential weapon for police officers to use as a means of non-lethally capturing crooks. I invented some prototypes and gave them to Spider-Man to test drive. Based on his experiences with them, I then invented this web-firing gun that I sold to the NYPD for Fifteen million dollars. Thanks for asking." Now if a dumb writer can come up with that cover story, I'm pretty sure a supergenius capable of inventing web shooters could as well. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:54 p.m. CST
The series will compete against the self-help industry as Charles Xavier uses his special talents to 'fix' people during his hour program. 'We'll I figure, why waste my time leading by example when I can just go into these poor saps noggins, wipe out the gunk, and send them on their way. It's quicker, plus the money's unbelievable!." Explains Xavier.
Jan. 18, 2011, 8:58 p.m. CST
arc,Wayne founded the Batman Corp,a worldwide organization which will have batmans around the world ready to fight crime when needed...sigh...
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:02 p.m. CST
he is completely right.bravo sir.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:25 p.m. CST
Stupid old goat used them to rob banks! You want a full list of just Spider-Man villains with inventions or talents that could have gone into business rather than being constantly jailed? Or more of toruk_makto's examples? (I do btw) Sorry killik and PAD, I think aside from the genre trappings that comic-book characters rarely do this (Reed Richards supposedly does, but does anyone else have a pogo-plane or access to the Negative Zone? Saying he makes money from his patents or whatever is a way of explaining how he affords all that stuff, not a logical extension of what a super-scientist would logically do to make $$$) I don't think Peter Parker would come that close to admitting he 'knows' this Spider-Man vigilante to the authorities, he'd surely be on some government list, or the story would get out as the webbing became so profitable? Then the villains kill his loved ones, etc - even if he's just famous for being Spider-Man's friend and enabler. Eh, even admitting he takes all of Spider-Man's photos is already kind of risky I admit. But a. It's too risky to profit from his webbing, and b. it's not what comic book heroes generally do, logical or not. Apply too much logic and they'd all be dead pretty quick anyway one way or another.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:40 p.m. CST
I cannot stop posting this until it happens.Karl Thommason deserves to come back NOW!
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:41 p.m. CST
Having both does make some sense. It would be logical for him to be able to produce webbing organically along with the other spider-powers he inherited. But a mechanical device would allow him to control the rate, speed, direction, consistency, etc. That approach would validate his nerd/scientific prowess, since only his technical wizardry could make his natural state into something that could be used as a dynamic weapon. I'm a Spidey fan from childhood, but fairly neutral on the organic/mechanical debate. I like the way the mechanical shooters make his science-nerdiness an integral part of the character; in that sense, they seem superior. But once things get underway in a film, no one's paying attention to the details of the web anyway.
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:46 p.m. CST
by Peter David
"Apply too much logic and they'd all be dead pretty quick anyway one way or another." Naturally all comic books require a certain suspension of disbelief. The most obvious, which you didn't bother with, is why would villains operate in cities where superheroes live? What person in their right mind would commit crimes in Metropolis? Sure, the Joker hangs out in Gotham because, to him, it's all about messing with Batman, but what ground level thug would risk getting the crap kicked out of them by Batman on patrol when it can't be THAT difficult to find a large city that's superhero-free. The thing is: We're discussing a movie. A different environment, a different place to tell a story. It has to make internal sense all its own. Or at least it should. The argument you're presenting, to put it delicately, sucks. You're saying that, because comic books fundamentally make no sense, movie versions of those comics don't have to, either. Is that really the position you want to stake out? Oh, and drawing analogies to villains is just ridiculous. They're criminals and sociopaths. Naturally they use their acquisitions and weapons to that end. Form follows function. Oh, and I think Daedalus invented man wings a little before the Vulture did. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:51 p.m. CST
Tony Stark uses his technology and wealth to help the world.The same goes with Mr Fantastic. Dont forget that the Avengers team was created thanks to Stark' resources.Hell even their HQ is one of Stark's mansions. The super-villains use their powers to become rich or to conquer the world.There are both heroes and villains who work as mercenaries and use their powers for hire.or they work for the government like Captain America does who also gets paid to do what he does.he doesnt have a second job you know.' and something else.PP in the comics does exploit his SM alter-ego to make money.but instead of beating people in the wrestling,he takes pictures of him fighting criminals and he is paid very well for that.he is doing the exact same thing. so why exactly is in contrast to his character and to super-hero comic genre,to sell his fucking invention and become rich thus being able to help more people and in a better way,both as a philanthropist and SM?
Jan. 18, 2011, 9:51 p.m. CST
He deals with the problems that all of us face, and that's the source of his relatability. But from the very start, Parker was absolutely not an everyman. He was an exceptional young man with exceptional capabilities, in circumstances that didn't allow his exceptional traits to shine. He's a science genius, but he's poor and has aging family to take care of and has poor social skills. So he's a very *human* exceptional person, full of human flaws, but still exceptional. Marvel heroes are almost all exceptional, non-everyman types - their human flaws connect us as readers to them, and their non-everyman qualities transport us into the fantasy realm. That, ultimately, is what Parker is: juxtapositions. By stripping away all of his inventive genius and transferring all exceptional capabilities to organic powers, the balance is tipped away from him being special. Which may be a good fit for today's "I'm a slacker, but nobody's more special than me" entitlement culture, but not a good fit for Spider-Man.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:04 p.m. CST
that's the only argument you need to support your opinion.heh.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:15 p.m. CST
Relatability goes right out the window there, at least for 99.95% of us.
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:34 p.m. CST
Mr. Logan, a former member of the now disbanded X-men provides access news with inside information of this amazing new development! Logan: "Well the big brains over at Hero Corp finally convinced me to supply them some of my blood. Turns out they were able to take it and engineer a serum that cures all ailments, including the big C." Reporter: "That's unbelievable Mr. Logan. Some have wondered, given you and your associates previous pro bono hero services, whether this too will be offered as a gift to mankind?" Logan: "Gift, What, like for free?" Reporter: " Uhm, yes." Logan: "Get real, bub, Reed told me the boys are looking to charge $10000 a pop, better dig in those piggy banks kiddies. Me, I got a cool million and lifetime supply of booze out of the deal."
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:47 p.m. CST
I hated it the minute they introduced it back in 2004 in the comics while previously I had tolerated it for the Raimi films. But I'm over it. It's complete horseshit, even when factoring in the load you have to bear when reading a Spider title. Having a finite amount of web fluid actually made the character interesting - it showed that he couldn't just pack 500 canisters of the shit to compensate for some overlong battle with the likes of the Shocker or some other villain. It'd leave him time to fucking improvise if he ran out and use the actual powers he got from the damn spider bite. Also, WTF is this "wonder epoxy" shit. The web fluid was designed to fucking DISSOLVE after a set time originally, so what the hell would it be effective in holding together?
Jan. 18, 2011, 10:58 p.m. CST
Peter David or not, that's hilarious. We've been given no reason not to believe that Parker is intelligent (if not Reed Richards level, then a few notches below) - never once leading us to consider he isn't/wasn't capable of inventing something like a mechanical device (rudimentary early on, refined throughout the years). That in some bizarre reality organic shooters would make him more relatable is absurd. Brazenly so. Then again that seems to be Marvel's general stance these days. Force absurdity onto the fanbase, weed out the diehards and then bilk the remaining suckers for all they're worth.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:03 p.m. CST
by Peter David
"He deals with the problems that all of us face, and that's the source of his relatability." Obviously the whole point of Spider-Man, as Stan and Steve created him, was that he was to deal with the problems of the everyman: money problems, sick relatives, inner doubts. As opposed to the god-like superheroes of the DC universe whose major issues were green rocks or nosy girlfriends trying to scope out their identity. In the Marvel Universe, even the heroes who were actual gods were also lame...literally. The point is: the problems Peter Parker faced, those of the everyman, are largely absent if he's of such unparalleled genius that he can whip up something as sophisticated as a webshooter with almost no effort. Yes, inventive geniuses have their own problems (I assume) but they're not the everyman problems that average kids face. Which is what Raimi obviously realized when he decided to go with the idea of the organic web spinners. Claiming that removing the concept of mechanical webshooters somehow makes Peter Parker no longer special...that's ridiculous. What makes him special is that, having learned a terrible moral lesson, he decides to dedicate his life, even at the cost of his own happiness, to trying to save people from being hurt by criminals. Even though there's no money in it (the Bugle photos are simply after the fact.) Even though he could be killed. Even though the specter of Spider-Man stands between him and happiness. He simply cannot stop trying to expiate his original sin. It's his personality and drive that make him special. In fact, claiming that it's some high tech bracelets on his wrist that make him special, and not his dedication to his mission, does a tremendous disservice to the character. It shows...dare I say it...a lack of respect. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:29 p.m. CST
by Peter David
But it should have been. PAD
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:36 p.m. CST
came out of his mouth ala Alien and was introduced,though briefly,in JMS's run. that was the epitome of absurdity in PP's super-powers which had nothing to do with spiders,but what was more retarded was JMS's explanation after the criticism he received about this: "it's only a comic.." if people hate Raimi for the introduction of organic web-shooters in the movie adaptation,then they should burn down Marvel after the more extreme atrocities they did in the character.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:38 p.m. CST
Dedicating one's life to fighting crime at the expense of a normal life isn't original to the Parker character. Batman and Superman, among pretty much every other superhero (and many historical and literary heroes, for that matter), have already gone through the arc of tragic loss > redemption > personal sacrifice for the greater good, haunted by demons. That is what makes Parker a superhero. But not what makes him uniquely Parker. Parker, I say again, is a juxtaposition. He's an inventive scientific genius, *but* he's poor and tied down by circumstances and can't make the most of his talents. He's a good looking guy, but he's crippled by awkward-at-best social skills and a chip on his shoulder. He's heroic and self-sacrificing, but he's also selfish and every so often trips over the same lesson he learned that started him on his quest. He is plausible and implausible. He *has* to be both plausible and implausible, or else it's not Parker. I'm not saying it can't be Parker without mechanical web-shooters. I'm saying that having Parker be *exceptional without his powers* is an essential part of the character. Parker's everyday problems are things we can relate to, but the guy's an exaggerated oddball in a lot of ways, and that's what makes him uniquely Parker, and not every other superhero who's gone through a similar arc. Parker's mission and drive is what makes him a superhero. Parker's *unique* personality and abilities - and flaws - are what make him Parker. He deals with the same issues we do because he's a human being living in our world - he's trapped in our context. But he isn't an everyman. It looks like an issue we'll have to agree to disagree on, but when I look at the Marvel stable of characters, I see a marvelous collection of oddballs, outcasts, misanthropes, and all manner of other extremes, all grounded and united by human fallibility.
Jan. 18, 2011, 11:39 p.m. CST
Jan. 19, 2011, 12:51 a.m. CST
The Jewish Community is severely under represented in Comics and comic book movies.
Jan. 19, 2011, 1:16 a.m. CST
Not only because it makes little difference as to the quality of the story and film, but because I am just not caring about this movie at all. I keep looking at it hoping to get some idea of why they are rebooting it all, and I've yet to see it. Looks like it almost could be Spidey 4 except this time he's in high school again. Lizard, Gwen... it's like picking up where the others left off anyhow.
Jan. 19, 2011, 1:47 a.m. CST
A quote from the wiki page. "Scientists from the History Channel's Spider-Man Tech stated that logically, if web fluid were to exist, it would not be possible for Spider-Man to store the necessary propellant and fluid in a small cartridge, as a result organic webbing would be more realistic as far as his webbing use is concerned."
Jan. 19, 2011, 8:08 a.m. CST
One suspension-of-disbelief concept, like the bite of a radioactive spider giving him certain powers, is bad enough, but adding a second in him also being a genius inventor is just too much.
Jan. 19, 2011, 8:10 a.m. CST
You accept that a guy changes into a Spider-man, but you've got a problem with mechanical web shooters??? Jesus, how I hate geeks these days.
Jan. 19, 2011, 8:36 a.m. CST
by Peter David
Hitchcock espoused a philosophy that he referred to as "the MacGuffin." The MacGuffin was the (sometimes preposterous) element upon which your film stood and which oftentimes drives the hero. It was the unlikely happenstance upon which your plot hinged or, for that matter, upon which your world is built. In "Citizen Kane," it was Rosebud. In "Raiders of the Lost Ark," it was the Ark. It can also be conceptual. In the case of Spider-Man, the MacGuffin is, basically, the radioactive spider (it's also the catalyst, really.) The notion that a human can acquire spider-like powers from being bitten by a radioactive spider (or, in the movie version, a mutated spider, because that just makes EVER so much more sense.) But you only get one per story. If you pile MacGuffin on MacGuffin, you run the risk of shattering the suspension of disbelief. It's one of the reasons that the first "Hulk" movie was so muddled. In the Hulk's "real" origin, he's hit by gamma radiation and is transformed instead of, y'know, dying. In the movie, that simple, clean MacGuffin had unlikelihood piled upon unlikelihood. He was hit with gamma radiation; oh, but he also had nanobots involved; oh, and also when he was a kid his crazy father experimented on him. And the viewer is sitting there going, "WTF?" If you buy the premise, no matter how absurd, you buy the bit. Having Peter develop organic webshooters is part of the premise: guy gets spider powers from bite. But, oh, it also Just So Happens that the guy is so freaking brilliant that he can make mechanical webshooters? As the Church Lady might have said, "Isn't that conveeeeenient?" The origin of Spider-Man piles unlikelihood upon unlikelihood. Now: does it matter in the long run? Of course not. First of all, we were kids when we were first exposed to it and kids will accept a lot. For that matter, "Oliver Twist" functions almost entirely upon unlikely conveniences of plot, and it's a classic. Second, the unlikelihoods don't push it TOO far: It's not as if the spider suddenly turns out to have been an advance scout for an alien race of mutant spiders who want to use Peter Parker as a vanguard for their invasion. AF #15 remains a classic, even though it's absurd to think that a teenage boy got spider powers and was a scientific genius enough to make mechanical webshooters and also developed some manner of amazing ESP that no spider in the animal kingdom has. But people shouldn't then turn around and condemn a modern day retelling of the story simply because it makes the effort to stick to one MacGuffin, which is technically what you're supposed to do. PAD
Jan. 19, 2011, 8:42 a.m. CST
No, I'm not saying comics fundamentally make no sense, I'm saying they have their own genre trappings which require us to suspend disbelief. We agree there, right? And movies are not so different, but I get that in an adaptation to a different medium, with a potentially wider audience who don't understand all the genre rules, compromises or changes are understandable. Like you, I grew up with those shitty versions of Spider-Man, TV Daredevil, Thor etc, and Raimi's movies got so much right that I didn't care about the organic web-shooters. It's still less important to me in this next movie than whether the thing will be well-made, feature spidey-quips and be true to the characters in spirit as much as possible. I entered this TB (which is purely devoted to the subject of mech vs bio) to rebut anyone saying mechanical web-shooters were inherently dumb, or that Parker would definitely be able to make himself rich off them. I don't think those points are stupid, but I also don't think having Parker make the web-shooters ruins all logic in a super-hero movie where audiences won't care or even think its cool if it's done well - while pointing out that it might not be so simple to get rich from his webbing. Fun to discuss is all. The previous Spider-Man movies didn't explain where Parker got that costume, it certainly doesn't look home-made. Changing the Green Goblin's costume was supposed to another allowance for logic, but we don't know if mass audiences would have preferred the 'real deal' and we know almost all fans hated it. Audiences accept (but joke about) the fact that Lois can't see Clark is Superman. They buy that John McClane is always in the right place to stop terrorists etc, but never seems to get a promotion or any respect. They will still go and see a Bond movie even though the logical fallacies have been lampooned for decades. They love that Indiana Jones can survive a nuke by hiding in a... no, forget that one. Anyway, organic or mechanical, the audience could take either IMO. This is a reboot, so why not give the mechanical ones that Peter invents a shot? It is undeniably truer to the source material.
Jan. 19, 2011, 9:24 a.m. CST
by Mr Nicholas
Jan. 19, 2011, 9:35 a.m. CST
by David Cloverfield
His costume is made by professionals for his wrestling carreer. His webshooters are made following his father's research (the same that leads to the Venom symbiote). A good screenwriter can make them work.
Jan. 19, 2011, 9:36 a.m. CST
Is a fine argument. But let's look at Superman, who has been very popular outside of comics. The McGuffin is that he's an alien with super-powers, pretending to be a normal human some of the time. The fact that nobody sees through his disguise is a stretch, and could have been 'fixed' for non-ten year old movie-goers if they given him a mask. Glad they never did that. Also the aliens looked just like humans. Also there is no scientific way his flight power could really work, or at least none we are ever presented with. Heck, in the movies they gave him a bunch of new powers that made less sense. You can't turn back time by flying round the earth really fast. Etc. But people loved that movie. Now should Spider-Man be more realistic? Maybe. But most of his powers don't make much sense either. Does him inventing web-shooters add an unbearable extra layer of credulity stretching that would take the audience out of the movie. I don't know, I don't think so, and it seems the new movies are giving it a shot. It depends how it's done, and if there's already a science project going on at his school he can tweak, or the spider-bite shows he is given the knowledge how to make the fluid, all the more credible.
Jan. 19, 2011, 10:11 a.m. CST
by Peter David
I'm sorry, I can't address you by your full moniker, but it's just a little too silly for me to type. No offense. Anyway, I think people loved "Superman" in spite of, not because of, the shortcomings, such as the notion of his turning back time by flying around the world real fast. They accepted it because then it meant that Lois didn't die--or, more particularly, that Superman failed to save her--and viewers will forgive a lot to get a happy ending. Even stuff that's monumentally stupid. Actually, though, "Superman" accomplished one amazing thing for me. I didn't believe a man could fly (as the promo lines promised) but I did believe, for the first time as a comics fan, that a man could come across as two entirely different people with mainly a pair of glasses. Chris Reeve, God rest him, made a believer out of me. Comics cannot convey what Reeve did: Pitching your voice differently, collapsing your spine. To me the single greatest effect in that whole film is when Clark is at Lois' apartment and he takes off his glasses, stands up straight, deepens his voice and says, "Lois, there's something I want to tell you." It's like Superman has entered his body. And then he loses his nerve and Clark Kent reinhabits it. So basically I would have agreed with you, once upon a time, that the glasses disguise was silly. But now, post Chris Reeve, I don't anymore. As for why not use mechanical webshooters in the film...I dunno. Why not? I haven't said at any point there's no reason NOT to. I just said that if they decided to go with the organic webbing, that they shouldn't be condemned for it, and explaining the reasons why using the mechanical ones could be argued against. Oh, and as a general note--not to you, I should emphasize--I should mention to posters that responding to me by telling me to fuck my arguments shows the intellectual capacity of a box of rocks, and is not the best way to get me to take anything you're saying seriously. On the other hand, if your intent is just to get me not to respond to you, then hey: keep at it. That way you can go tell your friends, "Hey! I'm too stupid to get Peter David to talk to me! High five!" PAD
Jan. 19, 2011, 11:35 a.m. CST
Those who recognize during play that there is a force called gravity and those who do not. Those children, who do, make the effort to ensure that their action figures feet touch the ground in a semblance of walking or running when going from place to place. The action figures of these children magically float from destination to destination. They are clashed against their enemies like tambourines with nary a concern for limbs like arms or legs. I posit that those children who recognized gravity make better storytellers than the children who do not. This is likely because they understand that even the world of fantasy must be tethered by a thread of logic. This thread acts as the root from which all subsequent threads must spring. It’s this cohesion that paves the road for suspension of disbelief, a road that if constructed correctly is smooth and pleasant to travel. A spider’s web is produced inside silk-spinning organs called spinnerets. These organs are located on the underside of a spider’s abdomen. If anyone can pave a logistical road that explains why such a mutation, if it were to develop, would conveniently develop in Peter Parkers wrists and not his fucking ass, I will tip my hat. If you cannot, than I ascribe to you the title of ‘Ignorer of gravity’ and charge that you simply want to have your cake and eat it too. I do not travel the logic roads of such individuals, for they are unstable, and fraught with danger.
Jan. 19, 2011, 11:38 a.m. CST
return the delete button guys!
Jan. 19, 2011, 11:56 a.m. CST
The biggest glaring issue in the Raimi films was the suit. That million dollar suit. Have any of you read the CINEFEX articles on the making of the Spider-Man films? I cost took several months, dozens of people and nearly a million dollars to develop. And it required a full body cast of McGuire. But the audience is asked to believe a poor 17 year old high school kid makes this state of the art, million dollar suit in secret living in his aunt and uncles house. How did he manage making a full body cast of himself? Where did he get access to a CNC machine to program and machine out of aluminum the elaborate web pattern mold? Where did he sculpt, mold and vacuum form those eye covers? Or the foam latex muscles that were sewn into the suit. Maybe his aunt and uncle were so senile they didn't notice the whole make up effects lab and costume shop in the corner of his bedroom. At least the new Batman films offered a more plausible explanation as to how aquired his suit and equipment. He had a whole division creating state of the art armour and weaponry for the military. And a helpful ally who modified it for him. It wasn't just just Bruce Wayne doing a few doodles in a notebook and magically putting this stuff together. But at least he could afford it. Yeah, it's based on a comic book. I am aware of that. It's not a special on the Discovery channel on how you would REALLY do this stuff. I guess this whole rant is just to make a point that it's a movie based on a comic and if you get to far into the weeds breaking this shit down logically then you're just sucking all the fun out of it. And for the record organic web shooters make since to me if only for the reason that if his body goes through all those changes, then why not get that ability as well. Just my two cents.
Jan. 19, 2011, noon CST
That explanation doesn't work for me. Spiders are amazing but act on millions of years of evolutionary instinct. They aren't known for their intellect. Now, if Peter Parker was bitten by a radioactive Stephen Hawking........
Jan. 19, 2011, noon CST
by Peter David
The proper phrase is, "Eat your cake and have it to." See, another part of being a storyteller is saying things correctly. The fact that many people, such as you, get it wrong, doesn't automatically make it right. Now: being the person who actually originated the concept of organic webshooters, I did indeed have Spider-Man 2099 comment that he was damned lucky the mutation he underwent didn't result in his shooting webs out his ass. It is, of course, preposterous to accept that the modern day Spider-Man can climb walls with the way that Marvel explained it (a sort of advanced static electricity) or as the movies did (with multiple tiny hairs.) The former does not parallel nature and the latter would result in tearing his gloves. Nor does the spider-sense have any basis in biology. So to suddenly draw the line at demanding biological fealty from the organic webspinners has nothing to do with the way the character's powers function and everything to do with where you decide to draw your arbitrary line. Again: buy the premise, buy the bit. You want a logical in-story reason? Fine. Nature decided that the most effective place, for the web spinners to develop was in his forearms rather than his ass because otherwise every time he tried to take a dump, he would accidentally web himself to the toilet. Happy? PAD
Jan. 19, 2011, 12:01 p.m. CST
by Peter David
Wish there were editing functions on this site. PAD
Jan. 19, 2011, 12:21 p.m. CST
Parker shooting webs out his ass would be a bit off putting to the PG-13 crowd. Marketing would have something to say about that. As well as the licensees lined up to make the toys and games. It is the movie business after all. And it would require a radical redesign of the costume. Something along the lines of ass less chaps.
Jan. 19, 2011, 12:29 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
and it's another entirely to act like a pretentious ass. Guess which category your comments place you in, Peter David. You come across as a man who enjoys the scent of his own flatulence with comments like "I can't bring yourself" to type a member's avatar or "Hey! I'm too stupid to get Peter David to talk to me! High five!" I get that you need some sense of geek worship, or else you wouldn't drop your real name on here. Just so you're aware, because you're obviously not...you're not the only writer who frequents this board. My suggestion would be for you to get the fuck over yourself, Peter...because the simple truth is, I've read your stuff and you're just not that good a writer.
Jan. 19, 2011, 12:32 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
the Mets fucking suck.
Jan. 19, 2011, 1:22 p.m. CST
Really, when I read a statement like, "His costume is made by professionals for his wrestling carreer. His webshooters are made following his father's research (the same that leads to the Venom symbiote)," I just think, you idiots are just playing in someone else's sandbox. Stan Lee and Steve Ditko don't need your help. What passes for imagination - usually cloaked in the timid defense of "making it realistic" - in so many modern updates to the classic characters is a joke. We don't need prequels, we don't need "reimaginings", we don't need people who think these works of pop-culture genius are flawed and need touching up by amateurs. In my opinion.
Jan. 19, 2011, 1:37 p.m. CST
I'm agnostic on the webshooter debate, but that's tasty nibbling.
Jan. 19, 2011, 1:51 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
then his self-inflated opinion certainly would have been a McLuhan like moment. I've read Lee and Ditko for many years, and have long admired not only their work, but their vision. Peter David is no Lee or Ditko.
Jan. 19, 2011, 2:03 p.m. CST
by Peter Franks
could easily be seen as a man who loves the spotlight (and has rightfully earned every minute in it), Ditko has avoided the public eye for decades now, instead choosing to let his work speak for him. Peter David is certainly no Steve Ditko, neither in his abilities, nor with his feeble attempts to curry geek favor by slumming with the commoners here in at AICN.
Jan. 19, 2011, 3:19 p.m. CST
...if ya know what I mean. (rimshot)
Jan. 19, 2011, 5:27 p.m. CST
I remember when there was a big controversy with the organic web shooters in the first movie. This is good news for sure. The organic web shooters came from Jim Cameron's script/ment. But in that Peter Parker did where mechanical webshooters outside the custom and told everyone they were webshooters he invented because he was worried about reaction he would get if people knew they were organic. I always thought that was an interesting idea.
V3D: "How did he manage making a full body cast of himself?" I think you totally misunderstood the article you read. The costume was supposed to be form fitting, clinging tightly to Peter Parker's body. The idea wasn't that Peter Parker made a full body cast of himself. The idea was that the producers made a full body cast of Maguire so that they could produce costumes that could be worn by a variety of stunt men. The costumes were molded so that they would basically be exact replicas of Maguire's body, and thus all the stuntmen would appear to have the exact same body contours as Maguire. This would help sell the illusion that it was always the same guy in the costume, rather than having Spidey's body changing from stunt man to stunt man. Peter Frank: "I get that you need some sense of geek worship, or else you wouldn't drop your real name on here." Noooo. I use my real name because I have this wacky notion that if people have something to say, they should stand behind it. I think it takes a rather strange mentality to think that the simple act of believing people should own their opinions is some sort of cry for geek worship. In point of fact, the smart thing to do, if I truly cared about people loving me, would be NEVER to sign my name to my opinions. That way I wouldn't have to worry about random blowhards running around crying, "Whaaaaaa, Peter David's been meeeeaan to meee." I talk to people who I think are worthwhile. That's simply good time management. You've managed to prove that you're not, so...well done you. Kevred: "We don't need prequels, we don't need "reimaginings", we don't need people who think these works of pop-culture genius are flawed and need touching up by amateurs." Why not? Seriously: Why not? Mankind has been doing it for centuries; for as long as there has BEEN a mankind, probably. Heroes are conceived and reconceived and reinterpreted from one generation to the next. That's where mythology comes from. People hear stories, and they build upon them and pass them on and other people come up with their own spins. The tales of King Arthur began as stories sometimes around the Fifth and Sixth Century. Then around the 11th Century, the French said, "You know what these stories need? They need a knight who is the greatest knight of all. He will be so fantastic that no one can beat him. He will be so sexy that the queen will cuckold the king to be with him. And, of course, he has to be French." Which is where Launcelot came from. Superman, Spider-Man...yes, they were commercially produced, but they are our modern myths. Kids come up to me at conventions and show me their home made comic books featuring Spider-Man or heroes clearly inspired by him. Decrying the notion that people want to reinterpret the character and build their own stories around him...I don't get it. Fans shouldn't be outraged by this. They should be thrilled that these characters are firing the imagination of generation after generation of storytellers. The true accomplishment of Stan and Steve isn't that they created a character who had mechanical webshooters. The accomplishment is that they created a character who has become bigger in the minds of fans and pros alike than his source. When you consider the hundreds upon hundreds of characters consigned to the scrap heap, gone to dust and long forgotten except by the most rabid of devotees, that's a monumental achievement. Rather than insisting that anything that strays from AF#15 is somehow an abomination, it'd be nice if fans were pleased that Spider-Man has reached such mythic proportions. Bravo: Yeah, I love that moment in the film. But to really match it to this, it would need to be Stan who comes in. You have no idea how tempted I was to drop him an email and get his opinion, but I knew that some people are just so entrenched in their opinions, it would turn into a "Fuck Stan Lee!" thread and I had no desire to see that happen. PAD
Jan. 19, 2011, 11 p.m. CST
We have people arrogantly claiming to be experts on what is or isn't "correct" Spiderman and an actual Spiderman writer shows up ala Marshall McLuhan to put the poseurs in their place. Bravo.
Jan. 21, 2011, 5:38 p.m. CST
http://splashpage.mtv.com/2011/01/21/spider-man-reboot-photo-mask-webshooters/ Anybody still feel good about this?