Cool News
SPIDER-MAN to debut Fall 2001 at your friendly neighborhood theater
Hey folks, Harry here. Expect some news on SPIDER-MAN very very soon. According to The Hollywood Reporter, SONY is hosting a gigantic "meeting today with about 400 potential licensing, promotion and retail partners for its planned fall 2001 release of the Sam Raimi-helmed 'Spider-Man: The Movie.'" So all you licensing, promotion and retail partners... dii dii dii deee deeee deeeee dii dii dii... that's are little signal to have you be johnny on the spot at UCLA at 4pm today. There are likely to be some details, like possibly villians, story idea or possibly even casting announcements. And we should all keep our ears close to the electronic rail we surf on, as news will be hitting about this. Check the key sites beginning tomorrow night and into Thursday morning for details. And as for the push from SUMMER 2001 to FALL 2001. That makes sense. In all likelihood they are not positioning SPIDER-MAN for NOVEMBER/THANKSGIVING Weekend, which would give the film approximately 25 days till it ran into the monster known as LORD OF THE RINGS.
-
+ Expand All
-
I really don't think the real title is going to be "The Phantom Menace".
-
Does it seem like they're rushing this to the screen to anyone else?
-
Maybe someone will be able to market a web spinner that you can actually stick under your skin so it looks just as CREEPY AS IT WOULD IF THEY STUCK WITH THAT STUPID ORGANIC SPINNER IDEA!
Just a thought.
This is my first post ever by the way, how did I do? -
I hope Raimi's excited about this one. He's at his best when the screen can barely contain his energy. Swing that camera around on the end of a rope if you have to!
-
and who is playing spiderman anyway? I do hope bruce campbell gets a cameo, or even a substantial part. Bruce as a henchman anybody?
-
May 03, 2000 5:47:23 AM CDT
Why worry about Lord of the Rings? Spider-Man would be more popu
by jeffcnn
That is all.
-
jesus damn you to hell for your slander or libel or whatever. How long has this film been in developement? It must have the most drawn out history of any film ever. It's coming out in over a year. So they're filming it this summer... ooooh say five months. Which gives them almost six to put it together. They've been testing the fx on it for months already and if they need to hire a large effects team... they will. I don't see this as being rushed. Rushed would be THIS autumn.
-
May 03, 2000 6:28:35 AM CDT
Johnny Depp could play a wooden beam that Spiderman swings on!
by dirtfish
I hope that Spiderman arrives soon as I really don't get this Lord of the Rings fad!
-
LOTR is going to be spectacular given the relativly early stages that have appeared in the trailer. Spidermans been done b4 (poorly) Raimi's coming off the Love of the Game but the Gift sounds like it might be good. I love comics and I'm keen to see X-men but Spiderman is actually at a low comics wise right now. I only hope they cast well and get a 1st class villan because otherwise this is gonna get a good 4 weeks and then be blown away by one of the most anticipated films of the last 10 years
-
whenever sam raimi is mentioned bruce is mentioned also, in fact
when anything is discussed(if the vortex of bile, hate, idiocy and ignorance that makes up talkback
can be called a discussion)then bruce gets a mention. strange... -
I don't really have a great feeling about any aspect of the Spider-Man movie at all and here's why? First off, I hope they don't ever distribute the title as "Spider-Man: The Movie" because it's a tacky and cliched tactic to sell a movie. Not only that but it sounds godawful. Why not just stick to calling it Spider-Man? or at worst "The Amazing Spider-Man"?
No one's allegedly been cast but Harry, Spidermanhype and everyone else gives us these fucking reports that someone's been picked and not that I mind it but everytime it happens it's only fan speculation and there is never a splice of truth to it. My hope is that the talented Ryan Merriman, the only contender who's 17 years old and of age will play Peter Parker. Either him or Wes Bentley would do it for me because both are incredible actors and look like Peter Parker. Merriman by far resembles him over every other candidate that's for damn sure. The only other one closest to that is Bentley. Finally, the Fall 2001 date is something I'm not happy about, because let's be honest who pays attention to movies released at that time? If they have to do it they have to do it, but it still should have been a summer release and I'm incredibly disappointed that Sony is doing this because now I feel the movie in the long run will get fucked over incredibly at the box office. -
I don't really have a great feeling about any aspect of the Spider-Man movie at all and here's why? First off, I hope they don't ever distribute the title as "Spider-Man: The Movie" because it's a tacky and cliched tactic to sell a movie. Not only that but it sounds godawful. Why not just stick to calling it Spider-Man? or at worst "The Amazing Spider-Man"?
No one's allegedly been cast but Harry, Spidermanhype and everyone else gives us these fucking reports that someone's been picked and not that I mind it but everytime it happens it's only fan speculation and there is never a splice of truth to it. My hope is that the talented Ryan Merriman, the only contender who's 17 years old and of age will play Peter Parker. Either him or Wes Bentley would do it for me because both are incredible actors and look like Peter Parker. Merriman by far resembles him over every other candidate that's for damn sure. The only other one closest to that is Bentley. Finally, the Fall 2001 date is something I'm not happy about, because let's be honest who pays attention to movies released at that time? If they have to do it they have to do it, but it still should have been a summer release and I'm incredibly disappointed that Sony is doing this because now I feel the movie in the long run will get fucked over incredibly at the box office. -
No offense but I'm getting a little tired hearing about the behemoth known as "The Lord of the Rings." Spiderman has the most potential as a blockbuster (and as a smell-buster). I want to see both but my desire for lotr is much lower. In fact, I predict it will be more disappointing than Spiderman. Most of the films that the dude who is making lotr have been amaturish at best. The Feebles blew. C'mon Harry, your being buds with the guy is making you toot his trumpet too loudly.
-
All the waiting. All the ranting. All the clever 'this is going to suck before I know anything about it' arguments. They will all be replaced by new rantings and predictions about the decisions that were finally made. Hopefully, the rumor mill concerning who will be playing Spidey will be closed in a few short hours. I'm sure today's meeting won't answer all of our questions about the film. Will Spidey have organic or mechanical web-shooters? Will Bruce Campbell have a cameo? Will Ted Raimi play twelve people in the film? I have full faith that Raimi will run amok with the Spider-Man mythos. I hope he stays fairly faithful to the comic's origin, but I am willing to accept nips and tucks here and there for adaptation's sake. I know that the posts will be flooding in five minutes after the today's meeting, exclaiming that whatever actor or villain(s?) used is going to make this movie SUCK. The X-Bashers will morph into Spidey-Bashers and go on another rampage. These talkbacks have become a playground for overgrown kids with nothing better to do than wax negatively about whatever subject comes up. And for the most part, these guys have absolutely nothing to say and provide no insight whatsoever as to why the movie is going to SUCK. I will keep my fingers crossed for this movie and hope that when I see it in the theaters in the autumn of 01 that I will be pleasantly suprised.
-
Though I'm much more excited for LOTR than I am for Spidey (despite my reverence for the man who brought us ED 1 and 2 and AOD), my gut feeling is that Spidey may have a broader appeal, particularly in America, where the average Joe simply can't read anything without pictures in it. To be more fair, also, Spidey is an American icon, LOTR isn't. So I'm happy that Spidey is coming out much before LOTR mainly because that will keep LOTR clear of Spidey, not vice versa. LOTR is my favorite story, and I'm glad I won't have to see the depressing event of a comics movie burying LOTR at the box office. As for casting Spidey, I'm still in favor of Jet Li. He'd kick ass in the action sequences, and you could just rename Peter Parker to Peter Park. It's a comic...who cares what race Spidey is?
-
Last fall the Sixth Sense was still cleaning house, and Double Jepoardy for whatever reason was making more then god should have allowed and 2 late fall entries Staurt Little and Toy Story 2 made some mega bucks too. I think Jan. - March are slow monthes with Scream 3 and Erin Brockivich being the exception.
-
May 03, 2000 8:09:07 AM CDT
if spider man gets slated every day like x-men is i will be real
by jon l. ander
early word on x-men is positive almost everywhere but here. Stax says the script rocks, the trailers cool, there thinking about sequels already, marketing men expect it to be a big hit and all we ever do is whine about how it will `suck'. I don't know if people are still pissed about the costume changes or what but i just don't get the negative buzz.
-
I'm afraid that LOTR will instantly replace whatever happens to be at the top of the charts as soon as it comes out. In fact, I believe that we'll see the same kinds of lines wrapped around the theater that we saw for Star Wars - people camping out and all that. I've read a fewe people on this board saying that LOTR won't be as popular as Spider Man. LOTR was voted on Amazon to be the book of the millenium, and Tolkien was voted author of the millenium. Now of course that doesn't mean that everyone has to like it, and it doesn't mean that Spider Man will be unpopular. I think it will be quite popular, and have been waiting for a Spider Man flick since the first Bat Man. But I think the release date is bad timing. It will most certainly be eclipsed by LOTR.
-
All of my favorite movies from last year were released in the late Summer or Fall season. Fight Club, Magnolia, Sleepy Hollow, Being John Malkovich, American Beauty, Toy Story 2. Need I go on? The Thanksgiving season is the perfect time for Sony to release this film. Believe it or not, Spider-Man is geared towards all audiences and kids make up a great portion of that audience. I know that is a hard concept for us fanboys to understand, but one of the main targets is going to be a younger audience. Look at all of the children's films that have been released in the past years in the fall. Even pieces of crap kids films like the Rugrats Movie have dominated the box offices in the fall season. Sony has a guaranteed hit on their hands if they handle it properly. And now, quite possibly for the last time, the usual Spidey list: (deep breath) Jamie Kennedy as Peter Parker. A relative unknown, but a familiar face from the Scream series and Three Kings. He's young, kind of nerdy, and can handle comedy. Mena Suvari as Gwen Stacy. It is all important to have Gwen in the first two films. No Mary Jane. Peter can get the girl in the first film and she can meet her tragic end in the second. This is one of the most important stories in the Spidey mythos, second only to his origin. Suvari has those innocent China Doll features and is a pretty good, up-and-coming actress. Willem Dafoe (if not Liam Neeson) as Norman Osborne. Dafoe looks like the Green Goblin. He is older and menacing and a visually powerful actor. Norman Osborne in the first film where he calls the shots from the shadows maybe as the owner of the lab that irradiates the spider that creates Spider-Man. Green Goblin in the second where he kills Gwen. Jeffery Combs as Dr. Octopus. No one else plays a mad scientist as well as Combs. He has shown paranoia and dementia in The Frighteners and The Re-Animator. It is not hard to picture him with the goggles and the tentacles. Byrne re-wrote his origin to coincide with Spidey's so it would be fitting to put him in the first movie. He is the mad scientist that Peter, a science student himself, would become if he would deal with what life has given him differently. R. Lee Remey as JJ Jameson. No doubt about it. No Bruce Campbell in any major roles, especially the burglar that kills Uncle Ben. Just picture it. You're at that dramatic moment where Spidey catches the villain that kills his uncle and realizes that it is the guy he let go earlier. You don't want to break that tension by saying "Hey, there's Ash!". That would ruin a great cinematic moment. Bruce Campbell as the wrestling promoter who gives Spidey his name. A small but imoprtant part in the Spidey origin. Sorry for the long post, but this might be the last time I get to ramble about my dream cast before a real cast might be announced tonight.
-
And i even got to post BEFORE Wolvie6? Is he dead? Has his head exploded? Or did he just accept the fact that no matter what, Bruce will probably be in this movie... Poor Wolvie6.... Hard times will be ahead of him when they finally announce the casting for this movie...:) NUXX OUT.
-
If the buzz holds strong, it'll probably gross $50 mil over the holiday weekend, and it'll still have 2 more weekends to dominate.
-
Have McDonald's put venomous spiders in all of their Happy Meals. Kids can pretend they're Peter Parker and get bitten-And parents can watch in horror. (Or hope that their kid develops super powers) It's fun for the whole family!
-
May 03, 2000 9:34:22 AM CDT
My Spider-Sense is tingling...and telling me that a Fall release
by sam spade
Hmmm...doesn't sound like the studio has a lot of faith in this movie at the moment. Usually comic adaptation=summer flick. Especially when the character is as well known as Spidey. Well, now we just have to sit back and wait until the fanboys start crying "FAKE!!!" whenever any negative reports leak out about their beloved Webbed Wonder. It's too early to say "This will suck" quite yet. Or is it?
-
May 03, 2000 9:34:23 AM CDT
My Spider-Sense is tingling...and telling me that a Fall release
by sam spade
Hmmm...doesn't sound like the studio has a lot of faith in this movie at the moment. Usually comic adaptation=summer flick. Especially when the character is as well known as Spidey. Well, now we just have to sit back and wait until the fanboys start crying "FAKE!!!" whenever any negative reports leak out about their beloved Webbed Wonder. It's too early to say "This will suck" quite yet. Or is it?
-
I have to agree w/ Ambush Bug. Spidey is a well-known, long-established character that even people who DON'T read comic books recognize and love. While I trust a master like Sam Raimi (under his careful supervision I guarantee that this movie will be at the very least a load of fun w/ some great special effects and a familiar story) but even he will fall prey to the all-powerful demographics, especially when dealing w/ a character w/ such universal appeal as Webhead. Don't be surprised or hurt when you find that this film had been "dumbed down" for the kiddies and non-diehards. The X-men however - while they are a name indeed, they are not quite the institution that Spider-Man is. They appeal to a very select consumer market, namely adolescents and young adults. For everyone 2 toddlers playing with a Wolverine action figure, there are 2 DOZEN playing with a Spidey figure. The X-men movie was made for us, the ADULT comic and movie fans. So I say go see it. Enjoy it. See it twice! Because we will RARELY get to see a MAJOR comic book character handled the way we would really like to see them handled. Take care all.
-
I have always been rooting for Nicholas Brendon for the part of Peter Parker(let's face it, 90% of the time, the person playing Peter Parker will not be the person in the suit, it will be stunt doubles and CGI FX the rest of the time, the actual role of Spider-Man is moot) but I'd say from all the buzz this Merriman may have landed the part. I have seen a bit of "The Deep End of the Ocean", and from what I've seen, and the more recent pictures of this KID, I don't think he looks old enough for the part. And I hope his voice has gotten deeper since TDEOTO, and frankly he looked alittle "big-boned" in that role, not at all a physical type. Which is why, after all has been said, I would still like Nicholas Brendon as Peter Parker. He could pass for the age, he has experience with action, comedy and drama, he would fill out the suit nicely, but still look small and unassuming in the role of Peter Parker, and he could certainly take time off of Buffy to do this, afterall, it's not like they did anything with his character this season anyways.
Wungolioth the Wanderer -
Watch Iron Monkey (1993) it is the closest to the manic/comedic energy that the wall crawler is begging for. Hire Yuen Wo-Ping as your action director...hell, put Donnie Yen in the suit (like it would matter). As for Raimi alumni in cameo roles: How about Frances McDormand as Aunt May? She'd eat that part alive.
-
First off, I gotta love a guy who talks back on this site all the time and rips on fanboy geeks. Guess what, big guy, if you're here that much, you're one too. Secondly, as for Gladiator, speculation seems like a moot point now...the thing's coming out in two days. Wait till Monday and we'll see how it was received. Finally, as for Spidey, I kind of hope they don't cast a white boy to play Peter Parker and then hire a martial artist to get behind the mask and do Yuen Wo Ping moves. Spidey never trained in martial arts, so if you want to change the character to a martial arts master and have the moves done by an Asian, you might as well make Peter Parker Asian as well. Just my opinion.
-
I'm not trying to make any enemies or nothing, but LOTR is a very good epic tale. BUT, take a poll without the internet because the majority of the movie masses don't know who Harry Knowles and most dosn't even know what LOTR is. Ask any of the 90's Generation (16 and under) I can guess at least 80% has never heard of J.R.R. Tolkien, although 95% may have heard of Lara Croft. Infact ask anyone between the ages of 7 - 55 who is Peter Parker and i'm sure must could answear that without blinking. Now I'm not bashing LOTR, I'm going to see both movies no matter what. But I'm suprised how much faith people have in this movie, its good but why is everyone so down on X-men and Spiderman? A couple of years ago
the only medium we had were saturday cartoons and schoolastic paperbacks. Now we got no less then 4 comic based movies is development, we should support this trend for every two Batman and Robins there's at least on Blade. But I just don't see Spiderman in any kind of danger. I wouldn't be supprised if LOTR was pushed to the safe Janaury-Febuary time frame. I hope both projects the most success but lets be realistic. -
Seriously, Sony made an excellent choice in waiting until the fall season to release which is undoubtedly gonna be one of the hugest grossing movies ever. If it were released in summer, it would have to contend with the rest of all that CGI-induced garbage aka summer blockbusters.(And I am aware that Spidey is gonna be full of CGI, so that was slightly hypocritical of me.) The October-November-December months have good movies, but a lot of those are just dramas that are Oscar worthy and will only be seen by those who crave excellent period pieces and what not. Spider-Man has a clear range during that time.
-
As far as all this speculation of which "franchise" has better legs, I'd call it pretty even. They are different kinds of movies. Spider-man will attract the same kind of crowd that (unfortunately) looks forward to Will Smith-Devlin-Emmerich-Jon Peters-Bruckheimer flicks. LOTR will attract the literati-D&D crowd. If Raimi does it right (i.e. the Raimi way), Spidey will be damn FUN. If Jackson pulls off LOTR, it will be cool. BOTH movies will kick ass. It's not either-or...it's both. As you can see by my moniker, I'll be there on opening night to see Raimi's "The Amazing Spider-man" (THAT SHOULD BE THE NAME OF THIS THING). I'm such a huge Spidey geek, I'll probably love it no matter what (I have Amazing Fantasy #15!) I'll probably wait for the second weekend for LOTR. LOTR appealed to me as a kid, but it doesn't hold me the way Spidey does. Spidey is an ICON. Hell, his origin is TEN TIMES more tragic than Batman's. Bruce Wayne merely witnessed his parent's death. Peter Parker CAUSED the murder of his uncle. Talk about a character's motivation. Sure, Spidey cracks wise, but his actions have always been driven by guilt. The Sony tagline MUST be "With great power comes great responsibility." 'Nuff Said!
-
First of all, Spider-Man would kick LOTR's ass. Ask anyone on the street which of these two movies they would prefer. 75% would say Lord of the Who???? Make mine Spider-Man! Face it, LOTR is internet geek territory. Spider-Man however is more than that. It's a name that will draw crowds. Even people who don't collect comics (like myself). Spider-Man has the potential of becoming a huge blockbuster. Let me rephrase that; it already is a huge blockbuster, because everybody knows the name, LOTR doesn't have the same massive appeal as Spider-Man.
And about Ryan Merriman; he's definately one of the best candidates for the role. I have been a big supporter of the idea ever since he was first rumored. Seventeen year old, ten year movie experience, martial arts experience, has worked with Sony before, one hell of an actor, he's 5'10(Spider-Man's official height) and he's an award winning actor. Merriman could potentially grow into the role very nicely. The actor who will play Spider-Man should not be older than 22. Merriman- http://www.webcrest.com/merriman/graphics/main_ryan.gif, Jonathan Jackson(The Deep End of the Ocean)- http://www.ymshomepage.com/today/jonjackson1b.jpg, Jonathan Tucker(The Virgin Suicides), Chad Christ(Gattaca)-http://www.latalent.com/images/Chad_Christ.jpg are the best choices for the job I have heard so far. Boat Drinks! Jimmy the Saint -
...because the trailer (or rather the teaser) got more downloads than any Star Wars trailer, so that's saying a lot. I imagine that a lot of fans who see LOTR trailer playing in the theaters will just see the trailer and leave. hehehehe...
-
...anything after Thanksgiving is considered a Winter release. So why would Spiderman come out in the Fall when basically adult films are released? Doesn't make sense - more money would be made in Summer when kids and teens are all out of school. If it waits until Thanksgiving it will run into LOTR a month later at Xmas. I don't see how Spidey can avoid it.
-
Eternal, et al: Do you actually think a film based on Lord of the Rings will have as much public recognition as Spider-Man? Do you remember the box office grosses of all the Batman films (even the bad ones) and the Superman films? Spider-Man might be the third most popular in the Holy Trinity of comic heroes, but he's still damn popular. Even Dick Tracy made a lot of money! Do you think this country is that literate that people will flock to Lord of the Rings in droves? Wake up! I think it will be a great film, but let's face it: Tolkien may be read by more non-Sci-Fi/Fantasy geeks than any other "genre" author, but that is still a pretty small percentage of the public. To them, you can dress it up all you want but it's still sword & sorcery. Remember what happened to Willow? That had Ron Howard & George Lucas to promote, and it still tanked. Dungeons & Dragons will die a quick death, and Lord of the Rings may make a decent amount of money, but it's not going to do Star Wars numbers (Lucas was smart enough to mix the sword & sorcery with some space opera), and it isn't going to beat Spider-Man, not by a long shot.
-
Although I liked Darkman, Evil Dead, Army of Darkness, etc., I feel that Sam Rami would give Spider-Man sort of a straight to video feel to an otherwise big budget blockbuster. Just imagine having those cheap effects and over-dramatic shots when Peter Parker is turned into Spider-Man. Just replace any image of Darkman being all pissed off and going beserk, with a guy in tights. I hope the movie is great, and I'm looking forward to it, but I still have some doubts. Especially who Bruce Campbell will be chosen to play.
-
You know what this movie needs....Spider-Man, of course..But they need to put Venom in it also...could you imagine the special effects???
I have never been a huge fan of Spiderman, but I did really enjoy all the storylines with Venom and Carnage....can you imagine...A "Maximum Carnage" movie?? They've got my 7 bucks.
Also, the should focus on the relationship betwen Peter and Mary-Jane...give it a romantic touch, for the ladies to enjoy it also. -
The amount of Spiderman fans who think they are the height of intelligence on this talkback is ridiculous. They think LOTR is okay but SPIDERMAN is it. SPIDERMAN will be a saturday afternoon action flick, I do not believe it will have the style of the MATRIX. Sure it will be massive and I cannot wait to see it... but LOTR will be the biggest epic since SW. What annoys me most is the person who seems to think LOTR is the film fanboys are interested in. Marvel fans are the biggest fanboys there are... LOTR is literature and therefore attracts intelligent people. As for X-MEN... what a joke... I expect it to be worse then BATMAN AND ROBIN. COME ON SPIDERMAN FANBOYS! BRING ON THE ARGUMENT!
-
Personally, I'm a fan of both Spider-Man and LOTR but, as much as I want LOTR to achieve SW:TPM numbers, I do believe that Spider-Man will probably be the most popular of the two. Having said that though, I would prefer Spider-Man be released early enough to give enough time for LOTR:Fellowship of the Ring a chance to earn the money that's due to it. Lets face it, if you want to see movies in the same genre of LOTR continue to be made, you should support LOTR. As for the Fall being a bad time for Spider-Man if you think about it, summer of 2001 would be too early to do it right and summer of 2002 would put it head to head against Episode II. As much as I hated SW:TPM, summer of 2002 would be a bad time to release any action movies.
-
I'm looking to both Spiderman and LOTR to utterly, utterly kick ass. That's at best, of course. I think it's funny that the directors of both movies actually have very similar styles; Raimi's more efectively inventive, but Jackson's a little more coherent and a better story teller. To be honest, although Spidey is one of the best superheroes out there, and I think Raimi's terrific, I consider Spiderman to be a fun trifle (like X-Men) compared to LOTR. I also think it's ironic that people are dismissing LOTR's audience as "internet geeks" while claiming that Spidey has "man on the street" recognition. If anything it's the other way around. Most people have heard of both, but Tolkien was a university course at one point--it's a classic work of literature. Spidey is great but he's pop culture. At any rate, it's moot which one is more well known NOW; by mid-2001 everyone will be talking about both of these flicks, but LOTR will seem the far more momentous of the two. LOTR's impact on our culture has been much, much greater; it's just so great that it's hard to perceive. And if internet hype could make TPM a hit, I'm sure it'll work for LOTR. After all, we've seen plenty of superhero movies, we know what to expect. We've NEVER seen anything like LOTR.
-
First I want to say this is a pretty good talkback I think Harry should make that chat thing work, a lot of you got some great movie knowledge in you brain that I would love to pick. Now IGN has a great site as does Dark Horizons, but if the above is true and AICN is cavorting with the studios I say so what do what you can, they are getting the info out to us, it does kinda break your heart (if it's true) but I'm still going to come here either way. Now i have a confession I saw the LOTR teaser for the first time and it really got me salvaiting. But I still don't think it will do good in US if Spidey is in the same time frame. In the UK I know will LOTR will kick some serious booty. I live in Japan so I have to pay 3000yen (about 30 bucks) to see a first run film, first run being we just got Bone Collecter and Any Giving Sunday. Now all big name movies (Star Wars, Matrix etc.) we got pretty fast, BUT its still 30 bucks and don't get me started on the price of concessions. I really envy all my fellow Americans, you got the choice of freedom I got to take whatever import trickles my way.But don't feel too bad for me I got all the toys way before America gets the (PS2, Hong Kong specials) Anyways, AICN I couldn't care if you sold your soul to the devil for a walk-on in Jerry Bruckheimer's latest opus just keep giving me the Star Wars and Martix sequels and you have a brother in arms for life.
(p.s. I took a trip to Guam just to see TPM is that sad or what?) -
A teenage geek, his frail aunt and a crush on the school hottie. Lots of witty banter, and a villain with a very clear and REALISTICALLY portrayed goal. No, "Oh, I'm going to take over New York because the mayor cut funding to my project hoopla"... How about good old fashioned greed and a lust for notoriety? Just plain ol' criminal insanity. Split personalities? That's why I never understood Batman Forever -- they attempted to put two of the most important villains of that mythos into one film and then give them motivations that had nothing to do with their characters. What about Dent's split personality? It could've been so easy to portray that as his motivation for his evil deeds. But no, it was Dent wants to be rich with his desire for revenge on Batman reduced to one flashback. The Riddler was an egomanic who thought he was more brilliant than anyone else and let it go to his head. But here, he's revenge-driven because someone cut funding to his project. Stupid. The Green Goblin should be a man battling with his personality disorder, and Doc Ock should be an arrogant scientist who is so consumed by his own genious that he truly believes everyone is beneath him. I'm going to vomit if they throw in some kind of story with Ock lusting after a girl he can't have or some crap like that as his motivation.
-
May 03, 2000 12:21:04 PM CDT
America is a big country. The world is even bigger. There's pl
by superninja
I'm going to see them both, so there you have it. If they're both good, they'll both get my repeat business and a DVD sale. By the way, I think Harry's animation today is the BEST EVER!
-
It seems while the cat is away,the jackasses have played. I come back here finally and see I'm being flamed left and right by a complete jackass by the name of Veers. Lets get something straight jerky. Unlike you I have a life. I don't sit in breathless anticipation for any little news bit about that no talent hack Bruce Campbell. Go jerkoff to your Evil Dead ,Army of Darkness collection and once and for all shut the hell up!! Complete idiots on this site,I tell ya.
-
..see my previous post to Veers and know your role.
-
OK obviously, Spider man shouldn't be doing kung fu because the character never studied it. However, I still think the movie would benefit from an experienced chinese stunt team in that really good martial arts performers could probably come closest to moving like a five foot eight inch tall bipedal spider with fists. Who would you hire? A Gymnast? A Dancer? The best wushu pratitioners are damn near olympic level gymnasts as well anyway.
Anyone see Ray Park's fantastic swordsmanship as The Headless horseman in Sleepy Hollow? An excellent example of an expert in Asian martial arts having the ability to tailor his moves to not look like "Kung fu" but still be visually stunning in that HK sort of way and fit within the context of the story and setting. -
May 03, 2000 12:40:01 PM CDT
Since when do fanboys care about how much a picture grosses?
by ambush bug
I don't understand the argument. I am going to see both of these movies and probably see each a few times. There's no need for a pissing contest from each of the movies camps. Box office gross means nothing. Even shitfests like Batman and Robin and Wild, Wild West were considered hits moneywise. Sure we want both films to be successful so that similar genre films will be made in the future, but to have a verbal battle as to who will make more money doesn't make sense. I don't care as long as the movie I am watching is well done and entertaining. Some of my favorite movies failed at the box office because the general public just didn't get it or they didn't want to get it. That's okay, I still liked the film. I think a truly good film will make money in the end, but to base the quality of a movie on how much it will make at the box office is wrong. That is the way studio executives think, not movie fans.
-
I don't know what kind of backwater community college you all have been attending, but I am constantly finding myself amused by this geek elite who go around praising LOTR as some kind of literary masterpiece because Amazon users rated it highly. Yes, Tolkien was a genius, a man who from imagination alone created entire worlds full of language, history, tradition, and culture. Yes, LOTR is a classic adventure, and a helluva fun read. But "literature" connotes a deeper breadth of meaning, a subtlety and purpose in the writing itself which is simply not to be found in the trilogy. Where, pray tell, is there any kind of subtext or comment on the human condition beyond a simple "There is Good and there is Evil"? Ohhh... Gandalf's a religious icon of faith and resurrection. Please. The latest Timothy Zahn tripe can match that, though it might not have the effort and history put into it that Tolkien did. Every character in the trilogy is a stereotype of some sort... and that's OK... it's as a good adventure should be. Sure, there is inspiration, comedy, and excitement, but just because a book's a book doesn't mean you can give it some huge deeper meaning. It may be art, but it literature it ain't.
-
Hey, I just wanted to add something here. For anyone who thinks Lord of the Rings doesn't have the potential outside the internet to be as big as Star Wars or anything, listen up. I live in Vancouver, and just recently the Vancouver Sun(Largest newspaper in the area) ran a front-page article on Lord of the Rings. It was the most responded-to movie article the paper ever ran.
LOTR will attract more than just the under-20 crowd, there's a huge fanbase in every age group(Unlike Spidey, who's pretty limited.) LOTR is actually more than just geek culture, and it's proven to be exceptionally popular with the people who HAVE read it, often with them reading it many times over.
If the movies can do the book justice, it's not only going to eat regular blockbusters like Spidey for lunch, but it's going to tear off his 8 little legs and watch it squirm first.
Christopher Lee has stated that the Lord of the Rings is going to be the biggest EVENT in cinema in a long time.
"It's sheer magic, and that's not something I say lightly."
And besides, Gandalf would kick Spidey's ass any day.
-
Remember how everyone thought that Tomorrow Never Dies was going to get flattened by Titanic? TMD made over $300 million and was released on the same day. Remember how everyone thought that Phantom Menace was going to flatten everybody? The success (financial) of EP1 only stoked the public's movie going interest and everyone profitted that summer.
If Spiderman is good, both movies will do very well. My guess is that LOTR will do better, simply because in the international market (Where significant percentages of box office are made) in places like, Oh I don't know, Burmha (did I even spell that right?) where people may have never heard of Tolkien or Spiderman (apologies to Burmese fans of either) They'll probably go to see the movie with the huge armies, magical creatures, and epic fantasy style special effects.
Willow tanked because it was lame. Aside from story issues, I really think that the technology just has not been able to tell a fantasy story on the same scale as Star Wars did Space opera. -
OK, like wouldn't it...um, be cool if um, like the studios all got together and um, you know, made a movie called... um, Lord of the Rings vs Star Wars vs Spiderman? This way we'd all, you know, like finally see, like who'd win in... like a really big fight. I think, um Star Wars would win 'cause they have like, spaceships and stuff, that can fly, so um that's why they'd probably win. I like Spiderman but, he'd probably lose first 'cause, um... he's only one guy. And then the winner could, like you know... take on the Star Trek guys. Oh, and like the Alien and Predator and the Teminator could be in there too. And, um, maybe Gladiator if um, it doesn't suck and makes lots of money. 'Cause like we'd only want movies that...um made lots of money in this um fight 'cause everyone knows that... um, they're the
coolest. And for those of you that um,
haven't read it... like a hundred times already, um here's Ambush Bugs cast list again- Jamie Kennedy as Peter Parker- Mena Suvari as Gwen Stacy- Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn- Jeffery Combs as Dr Octopus- and R. Lee Remey as J. Jonah Jameson. -
OK, Ambush, you're right. I was turning it into a pissing contest. There's no reason to care which one is "bigger" in financial terms. What we the fans should care about is the quality of the movies. As for Doorknob, I really don't think it's unreasonable to call LOTR "literature". It inspired writers both talented and untalented, it reshaped our thinking of fantasy and mythology, and it made a serious impact on our culture. It hangs together quite astonishingly (no easy task for mythologies this complex--see just about every other "cult" property). And it's not just Amazon readers who voted for it. The British literary society voted it the most important English book of the century. But that's beside the point. The important thing is that it is literature. It was the endpoint of an attempt to create an entire, self-contained mythology for Britain--and to some degree it worked. Unless you're going to dismiss things like the Arthurian cycles and the Bible as not being literature, you can't simply discount this area of fiction. Tolkien wasn't trying to be Hemingway or Dickens, he was staking out new territory by returning to an older one. Does that not have merit? And as for themes or depth...well, a couple of characters are archetypal in nature--Aragorn is very King Arthur-esque, Gandalf (in some ways) goes without saying--but that's because they're meant to be the "foundations" for later (specific) characters. And the hobbits are unique, well-developed characters. Anyway, who says a novel can't contain archetypes? Furthermore, your assertion that there aren't any themes deeper than "Good vs. Evil" implies to me you just aren't looking very hard. The entire point of the novel is to illustrate how our simpler virtues--steadfastness, loyalty, and quiet courage--are the real foundations of heroism, not sword-waving and force of might. (In which it differs quite greatly from the legends that form its' foundation.) It's also about forgiveness, the neccessity of war vs. the desire for peace, and, yes, religious faith. These don't have to be codified in some overwrought metaphor to be valid themes. In fact it's ironic that I'm defending Tolkien; I've always thought that his prose was seriously flawed and his storytelling abilities (or his "editing", so to speak) were somewhat weak, and I'm looking forward to the movies because they'll circumvent those problems. But I would never, ever deny Tolkien's literary merit.
-
You saved me the trouble of posting my Spidey Dream Cast again.
-
What the fuck happened to Napsters
did Metallica punk out Napster and they shut down? Or is my computer being silly?? Anyone else has this problem? -
I'm so sick of people just finishing their first year of literary analysis and looking down on any book that hasn't won a Nobel Prize. Literature has always been about inspiring and raising reactions from others, not how many life-changing lessons can we cram into a few hundred pages.
There's absolutely no need to look down a book that's inspired so many others to create. So, Tolkien wasn't the greatest pure writer. In my opinion, he was actually pretty mediocre. But he had a great imagination and vision and was able to allow others to share it, and that should be respected, not derided. -
In all reality what floats most blockbusters is special effects and story. Now I'm sure spiderman will have very cool special effects but did you guys SEE the LOTR trailer? The stuff that PJ's working on is going to be vastly superior to spiderman. And as far as story goes those who believe spiderman will have the better story of the two has obviously never read LOTR. How the story will translate to screen still remains to be seen but if taken on it's merits LOTR does have a better story. Now I'm sure both movies will do well but if pitted against each other the sword reforged will obliterate the web spinner.
-
A well done spiderman film will make more money than any of the LOTR's films.Spiderman is a brand name and will get the same youth of today audience as Episode 1. Do you really think young kids today even know what the hell LOTR's even is? Probaly not.
-
It's all fun till someone loses an eye! Why can't we all just get along? (Except for Veers and Wolvie6, as their fights are most amusing) I was going to say, if Superninja hadn't beaten me to to it, that there are people out there who are prepared to spend their hard earned cash to see more than one film a summer. Therefore, if both LOTR and Spiderman are good, everyone will be happy, won't they?
-
If your post is true, then I am very disappointed in this site. What makes this site so cool is that I feel it is being run by someone who loves films as much as I do. There is a quality, an integrity, and a genuine love of movies of this site. I think Harry's reviews seem to come from the heart. He is a true movie geek and although I don't agree with his reviews all of the time, I feel that what he writes is genuine. I hope Gladiator is as great as what Harry has been ranting about in past months. This isn't the only site that has been praising the film. What troubles me is the allegation that good reviews are being exchanged for first scoop information. I hope this is not true. I agree Harry should comment on this. But this is a very popular site and there is a lot of competition out there. This might be a false allegation. Harry can't comment every time someone says something negative about the site. I really don't like to read reviews for a movie before I see it anyway, so Harry's reviews do not affect my decision to go to the movie or not. But, I still hope these rumors are false for the sake of AICN's integrity. Anyway, back to the Spidey talk.
-
I must admit that amongst the younger crowd spiderman might be better known. Oh well. It matters not. Look at Titanic. For the most part it wasnt teary eyed adolescents going to see it over and over again. It was the older crowd. I was working at a theatre while that movie was out and it wasn't the kids that made that movie big. With that in mind a lot of the LOTR crowd are older people. The books were huge in the 60's and 70's and LOTR is a book not easily forgotten. I recently gave a ceremonial speech on Tolkien and my professor went off on a ten minute rant on how the books have made an impact on him and how he is highly anticipating the movies. I have talked to lots of people about the LOTR movie and almost all the semtiments expressed are positive. So yes Spiderman will be seen by the kids but LOTR will be seen by all.
-
the bottom line is that neither of these properties, Spidey or LOTR are at the peak of their popularity even more. I will say this however....Spidey is regularly outsold by X-Men, Batman, Superman, Daredevil, Silver Surfer, and just about every other comic book there is. LOTR on the other hand has sold more copies than any other book besides The Bible....that is a fucking shit-ton of books, and more than Spidey could sell in a thousand years...
-
just wanted to say that the TRON animation kicks ass harry
-
Sorry, had to change computers. I agree with you and I would not have even brought it up if it was just some other random web site. Now, since it is IGN making these allegations I feel that someone has some explaining to do. Either their claims are true and harry has been in someone
-
You say that it's "The man on the street" who matters in terms of box office grosses. But it wasn't "the man on the street" who camped out for weeks to see episode 1. It was--you guessed it--internet geeks. And let me assure you there are people just as obsessed and willing to camp out for LOTR tickets. I'll say it again, no matter how exciting it is to see Spiderman onscreen, it is something we've seen before--a comic book movie. That said, it's still way way too early to judge. The LOTR trailer could blow everyone away the way the Matrix trailer did; then Spiderman could wind up looking like X-Men. Or vice versa. (Though that would be pretty strange.) Trust me, the amount of anticipation NOW is completely irrelevant to either film's success. Of course, I think it's a given that LOTR will make more money--simply because it's THREE films. Unless it's a complete flop, it's going to multiply the potential grosses by three. But that's beside the point. Now that I think of it, these two films could be a blessing to each other. In terms of hype and buzz, I see Spiderman as being The Matrix and LOTR as being TPM. Seems to me there's no shame in being the cooler, sleeker, less weighty entry in the contest (especially if history repeats itself and LOTR is as big a disappointment as TPM). But I do say that LOTR will be the more hyped and anticipated of the two--whether it'll be better remains to be seen.
-
I'm 15 years old. Earlier this year, my english teacher made us all read THE HOBBIT. *Every Single Kid* in the class (except for me) absolutely hated the book. I mean REALLY hated. I, on the other hand, loved and immediately started reading LOTR.(I'm on ROTK now, and the books are friggin' GREAT) I don't really think anyone around my age will see the films. My parents and other adults I know who have seen me read the books have never heard of them before. None of this really bodes well for LOTR's box office. WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO!!!!!!!!
-
that i'll see any movie that has Natalie Portman in it. Thank god she turned eighteen, now I don't feel like such a pederast. We all know that she is the only reason TPM made any money at the box office - who can deny that innocent smile, those beautiful eyes? Now, if Jackson and Raimi want some serious hits on their hands they need to cast her NOW. I say Portman as Galadriel in LOTR (never mind remaining true to the source material - who cares anyway?) and as Aunt May in Spidey. Hey, there ya go... have the delectable Aunt be murdered (Portman dying? now *that's* tragedy, folks) and keep Uncle alive as... you guessed it... Ash! Oh, I mean Bruce Campbell. Then everybody would be happy! As long as they keep Portman/Aunt May's ghost around to advise Parker in the sequels a la Star Wars. It's my job to keep punk rock elite.
-
I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens with this AICN/IGN controversy. Hopefully, Harry will comment. Those are pretty strong allegations. Too bad everyone else is busy talking about who will make more money at the box office. Can't everyone agree that both movies are highly anticipated? It is too early to comment on the quality of either film. Both films will be successful. And its seems like everyone will probably be in the theaters come Fall 01 to see both of them.
-
Are you on crack? Nothing you said had any coherent meaning what so ever!
-
I agree. This has got to be one of the strangest talk backs I have ever seen. I
-
I doubt there is anyone who could not be looking forward to Lord of the rings. Spiderman suffered the inevitable, whos playing who? whos directing? crap that messed with x men initially, and star wras yada yada
but i am lookin forward to spiderman, have htey confirmed who spidey is yet?
but lets face it
NOTHING, except maybe star wars, can stand up to what lord of the rings will be.
now i'll just shamelessly plug my new registered site for student film makers, writers, critics who need a breal, but can't find one, with any luck the site'll kick off big gitme this time round. its uber underconstruction, but thats life, you gota problem? go sucka big rubbery one.
http://www.uniquesnowflake.co.uk
-
Too true. Bug, out.
-
Can some please explain to me why anyone on this planet would compare LOTR and Spider Man? I mean good god people, that is like comparing Star Trek and Conan the Barbarian!! They are not even in the same genre!! God my head hurts.
-
Every Spidey talkback Ambush Bug and i scream his name ,yet our calls go by unnoticed........
Jamie Kennedy IS Spiderman
I mean, check him out, it's him, and he's not very well known....
oh yeah..why is johnny depp dissed in every talkback on this site, whatever the subject??? -
I would just give up on any sort REAL conversation on today
-
...you might end up having to participate in that unintellectual "orgy"(though I agree with you and Bug). I think with enough emailing and posting, Harry will respond to that IGN allegation. As regards box office for Spidey and LOTR? I"m a movie fan. I'll see both. Who gives a tinker's cuss about their box office except the "suits"? This isn't a site for "suits" is it? Unless you believe IGN :)
-
Ever listen to the misfits? Now, that's what we need on the soundtrack. Old-school, with Glenn back in the driver's seat, not that shady Misfits:Resurrection crap or whatever the new band called themselves. C'mon, you can't have the misfits without Glenn. You know this to be true as well as I do. And we *both* know that for a truly great movie that will withstand the test of time, the music can't be dated. That's why Fight Club is going to be silly-looking in ten years. Techno. ugh. On the other hand, PUNK WILL NEVER DIE. Some people said the same thing about Bruce Willis, but look at him now and tell me who's smoking crack. Can't you just see Spidey (whom Jamie Kennedy should be cast as - he's hellaciously cool and shares a name with me besides) swinging across NYC as such classics as "Ratt Fink" and "Angelfuck" blaze out of theatre speakers in digital surround sound? Until that day, we shall all be doomed to a film adaption of my favorite wall-crawler (granted, in the arena of wall-crawlers he doesn't have much competition) that can only be described as shady. It's my job to keep punk rock elite.
-
I agree. I'm going to see both movies. ( I guess I have had my fare share of stupid arguments also ).
-
This isn't so strange a talkback after all. I mean... You have people for the film, against the film. People cursing people because they don't like both films equally. People berating others because one's made from a book and the other a comic. People belittling Harry for having this website. It's like a microcosm of society really. The fact is people as a whole really really really don't like each other. In fact they HATE one and other more than anything else in the world. 90% of talkbackers do not post in order to succint a conversation. They post in order to expound upon their views and just want everyone to agree with them and tell them how smart they are. They want to speak in monologue not dialogue. But this is irrelevant of me to mention. 90% of the people here won't even bother to read this post because a) It's not some profanity bound message against their favorite film designed to piss them off and b) it's not agreeing with whatever their saying. So why bother with it ? Perfectly understandable. It's much more spiritually pleasing to talk about how Johnny Depp is an asshole than to actually talk about what we think of the additional information included about whatever movie in the article the talkbalk is attached to. I mean why propose new information whenyou can just oppose what's there ? Why speak logically and explain your points when you can just say a movie "sux" ? I hate with a passion nearly every movie that a lot of film geeks like but I never EVER say that I didn't like it unless I can explain my point of view precisely. That's called courtesy. Oh well, to all three who'll read this "hi" !
-
Napster's working fine for me. Try uninstalling it, then re-installing it again. Older versions may have been ratted out, newer ones ar going fine for me.
-
Hey talkbackers, Claire here. As a personal friend of Harry's, this is bullshit. Harry writes what Harry thinks. His reviews are as pure and genuine as your own opinions. All of our reviews come from the heart. Harry probably has not commented on this because he is busy working on new stuff for the site, not buying scoops. Don't believe everything you hear. I can't wait for both of these movies to come out, but LOTR is going to kick some serious ass!!
-
if peter parker has to be played by someone 'established', then i'm thinking wes bentley or tobey maguire. if you want to go someone a little less well-known, try ben foster ('freaks & geeks') or - the perfect choice - jesse bradford (talented kid star of soderbergh's 'king of the hill' - no, NOT the animated TV show). and don't try to turn this into a steel cage death match between spidey and LOTR - there's room for both to kick it at the box office. if tim burton's 'planet of the apes' gets released around the same time, then there might be caue for concern, but why the fuck are we worrying about a bunch of cool movies in cinemas at the same time? wouldn't you be more worried if there was nothing but crap coming out?
-
There is no -VS- as far as I'm concerned. I've seen some smart, and some idiotic posts regarding the difference between the fanbases of the two movies. Yeah, the fanbases are VERY different, and should be, theyre two different genres. One is action-adventure super heroes, the other is high fantasy. The only commonality is that they're not set in the "real world" (and if someone can lock that one down for me, I'll be amazed)
Anyway, a breakdown -
Spidey :
target - young boys, comics fans, raimi fans.
likely strengths - strong comedy performances, FX, lots of action.
Likely weaknesses - plot going by wayside in favor of looks and "cool". Performances might not be as up to par as we would like, it's not a movie directed at the critics...which, surprisingly, from the previews, I think x-men IS.
Lord Of The Rings:
target - older audiences, late 20's to 30's, gender nonspecific. Theyre aiming at people who have grown up on tolkein and now see him as "great literature". Also pointing it straight at SW fans.
Likely Strengths - solid performances, classic story, FX
Likely weaknesses - taking itself way too seriously, losing flow of story in an attempt to be "faithful". (anyone thinks tolkein is smooth reading, try the friggin silmarillion)
Anyway, thats my overly long and new two cents, you guys are comparing apples and oranges here.
-=Patchwork
(no, its NOT a wolverine ref...it's from C:tD) -
The 1% that i disagree about is his casting idea about Mena Suvari as Gwen. Sorry. I think Mena is hidiously ugly and reminds me of a shaved paracete with a ten-year-old boy's chest. And her teeth and lips looks like she posed as a guy and wandered around through FIGHT CLUB for a while. She's not hot. I know Gwen ain't sexy either, but she still needs to have that innocent-pretty girl kinda quality, kinda like a girl down the street (girl next doors are always like skanks and porn stars, so i choose down the street). Casting Gwen is a tough job, but i wouldn't go with Mena. I don't know, Kirsten Dunst is a good actress with bad career choises. Though she hasn't done a good film since Interview with the Vampire, i think she coudl pull off a good Gwen (Dunst is not the best choice though, she's just a good suggestion). As for my Peter (huh-huh), though i like Jamie Kennedy, i'd go with Edward Furlong. He's the right age, has a body that could be worked around the edges with, and if anyone has seen PECKER, than you'd know he has the potential to be a good spidy. Also, i think Spiderman would be a bigger hit than LOTR because, seriously, there are a lot of people who don't have a clue what LOTR is. Sure, we do, but not a lot of the rest of the world do. Sure, LOTR is represented as a "mammoth", but that's because we know what LOTR is. IF you ask some people, they'll just have a huge ? above their heads. It's a wierd world that some people don't know what LOTR is, but it's true.
-
you are the man. you summed up nicely in a couple of lines what i have been unable to come to grips with in sheer hours of nail-biting and wrist-scratching. the only question which comes to mind is, if Raimi makes the right decision and casts Natalie Portman in Spider-Man along with William H. Macy as the kindly loving "father figure" (mmm-hmm, we *all* know what that means) would we get to see her work her porno skills? c'mon, you know she has them, remember the cut scene where Amidala made out with Padme while Han Solo's father (played by Rutger Hauer in a surprisingly short cameo) videotaped the whole thing on R2D2's little hologrpahic recording device? Strut your stuff, little Ms. Portman, that's all the fanboys have to say about that one. and did you all know that Jello is running for president? Don't vote for him cuz he's cool, vote for him because he's short. and that's not nearly all i have to say about that, but hey, it is my job to keep punk rock elite and all. thank you! i'll be here all week!
-
You know, this is the same thing that went WRONG with Episode I. When the production company is putting so much emphasis on marketing, liscencing and selling SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T EXIST YET then it makes for a really lousy movie. Part of the reason Episode I reccieved such a negative reaction was people were sick of being overwhelmed by plastic Jar-Jar's at WalMart. Obviously the people puching Spidey aren't in it for a good movie, but are just trying to create a quick buck. I dunno about youm, but the thought of thousands of plastic Spidey related crap at Taco Bell, KFC and every other freaking fast food place kind of turns me off the whole thing.... and cripes, they haven't even started shooting yet.
-
Spiderman is an overhyped, unoriginal, and thoroughly uniteresting superhero. He's Archie with a silly costume, little, if any, real superpower, and a hag named Aunt May to really slow the story down. Let's see a big screen treatment of the Wondertwins! Jan and Jace kick alien ass on the big screen!
-
What you all on ffs? I agree with the 2% of posts here that ask the question.. WHAT THE FUCK DOES SPIDERMAN HAVE IN COMMON TO LOTR TO COMPARE?! Man, sure Spiderman is gonna bring big bucks but so is lotr, so shutup about it !! Think bout this... a love disaster movie about a big ship that sinks... whoa that aint gonna make much money. But it did cos it was a good story, and a good film (though not my kind of film). LOTR is a fucken amazing story and after reading those books I seemed to be living the world of middle earth for weeks afterwards... Spiderman on the other hand is just a simple kick ass superhero dude who sticks to walls... and the movie is gonna rock (hope they have venom as one of the villains) !! SO stop your bitchen all of you... *ack* my heard hurts tooooo....
Only if Ghostbusters3 was comen out next year, that would be the film opposing studios will have to rekon with !!!! :P
quamb -
I went to sleep woke up ate some nasty ass cereal and I see the topic is still going strong! I still say I hope both movies take over 200 million just to ensure the sequels, well for spidey's sake were getting those LOTR sequels no matter what. I just want to know when is Final Fantasy coming out? FF is like LOTR as far as fan base, I've went though every FF game since it was on the nes, well acyually so many kids love video games they have a huge base anyway. Hey I answeared my own talkback! But anyone know the exact date? I wish it was tomorrow.
-
If Burt Reynolds would make Stroker Ace 2 your boxoffice yammering would be over...and remember, my dad can still whoop your dad's ass.
-
OK, just to start, I watched Galaxy Quest on DVD tonight, and after that, jonesing for more 'fish out of water' stories, I watched TRON. Then I get on here and see Harry's gigantic ass being digitized...then the spider-man thing...Damn.
Anyhoo, how about Topher Grace (eric forman) from that '70's show as Peter Parker? He can obviously pull off the in-your-face-you're-an-idiot-and-by-the-way-check-this-out sort of remarks spidey does...and why not Laura Prepon as Mary Jane? She's super hot, with the red hair and the thing...OOOOOHH! I got It! Kurtwood Smith as Norman Osborne! Set the whole movie in the 70's! Bruce Campbell (sorry, couldn't resist) as Flash Thompson! Lee Majors as The Lizard/Curt Connors! Stone Cold Steve Austin as The Sandman! A Furby as the Great Gazoo! - - - -Crap - wrong movie. I'm Spent. -
Never posted on AICN before, but the fact that some of you think Lord of The Rings has a snowball's chance in making a dent in a Spiderman movie... I'd like to ask who's providing your narcotics? Spiderman is an American icon, who's popularity reaches from coast to coast. Superman and Batman are probably the only two superheros more well known! (well, maybe Hulk because of the TV show). And their movies did pretty well (even the hideously crappy Superman 4 and Batman 4). OTOH, most people's experience with LOTR is limited to the Ralph Bakshi "Hobbit" cartoon. Beyond the geek sphere, this movie won't have too much pull. Webslinger wins in a total knockout.
-
Just because a hobbit isn't an American icon does not make it less popular or less recognizable. Over 50 million people have bought the books. That's one hell of a fanbase to work from. I also wonder if most people on this talkback who praise Spidey while bashing LOTR have actually bothered to read the books. I agree that Spiderman is well known but LOTR has been around a lot longer and has a larger fanbase. It also seems that Spiderman has been struggling lately while LOTR has been named best book of the Century. I don't know maybe I'm wrong. We will just have to wait and see.
-
For all of you arguing that the Spiderman movie will surpass LOTR's box office because Spidey is better-known: gee, you don't think New Line's going to be pulling off all the stops in terms of hype and publicity for LOTR? Believe me, before Fellowship comes out, everybody in North America is going to know what the trilogy's going to be all about. And like a couple of posters have already said, this is a big continent with a lot of people. I think both films will be do very well. As for which will do better, it comes down to which is actually better, right? From what we've seen of LOTR, it looks as though Fellowship is going to please a lot of moviegoers, especially the children who will love this great big on-screen fairy tale. And just how popular is Spiderman now? The comic books apparently reek now and Marvel's track record of producing TV/film versions of their properties hasn't exactly been stellar. If Spidey is a big dumb action movie a la Wild Wild West, it'll do well but won't sustain a long run at the box office. Ditto for LOTR, but I'm betting that LOTR will be better than that.
-
By the way, I think the best way for Spidey to appeal to everybody is just to KEEP IT SIMPLE. I'm probably in the minority here, but I would just tell the story that pretty much appears in Amazing Fantasy #15: how Peter Parker becomes Spiderman, how it changes him into this big media darling and swells his head, and how he's forced to grow up in a big hurry when his uncle is murdered. I've always thought it was a compelling, coming-of-age story, and exactly what nobody would expect from a huge studio blockbuster extravaganza. There could be all sorts of potential to satirize the media, explore identity issues, all that kind of stuff that's not normally the province of these types of films. Of course, this'll never happen, and we'll get the cruddy Batman treatment, where there'll be two over-the-top villains stealing the spotlight and all the best lines from Spidey. BTW, don't relish the idea of Tobey Maguire as Spiderman: Maguire's a decent enough actor, but his personality and acting style is all wrong for the role. Chris Klein's a likeable doofus, but that's it; so I don't see him as Spidey either. I like the Nicolas Brendon, Jamie Kennedy idea; just don't foist some non-talent pretty boy (Freddy Prinze, come on down) on us.
-
Look, I want Spiderman to be a big hit as much as anyone. If no other reason than it will help the Fantastic Four, Daredevil, and Hulk movies to get made. But why should anybody trust Raimi to save the superhero genre? He's NEVER had a hit movie. I love the Evil Dead trilogy but they were not successful. Nobody saw Crimewave. Darkman was moderately successful. There was big news for a while when Raimi decided to bring back the Western. Remember The Quick and the Dead? (lots of camera tricks--the movie sucked) Nobody saw A Simple Plan, his best movie. And then he sold out BIG TIME on For The Love of the Game. If Sam Raimi is the Great White Hope for the comic movie then we're all screwed. Here's wishing Bryan Singer the best of luck...
-
FINALLY! Someone with some sense. I hope you also see that there is absolutely no reason for the hero worship bestowed on Bruce Campbell as well. He has done NOTHING to deserve it! He and Ramiis legacy is crap flicks! I pray to god some other director will come in to save Spidey! Maybe then all these idiot fanboys will stop thier fucking Campbell posts. I really don't see why some on this site are so devoted to him and why I get flamed for thinking this. If they had thier way, he would star in every damn flick coming! Ol Dirtfish wants Johnny Depp in everything also but no one flames him.(By the way I believe Depp would be excellent as Bruce Banner.) You know he may have the "comic book chin" but thats about all he has going for him. Every role he is in he portrays a smartass. (He is more suited to comedy.) He is not Spidey. If you think so,you don't know Spidey! Maybe....and this is hard....MAYBE as a supporting role....J. Jonah Jameson perhaps. NOT SPIDEY! ...and before anyone else says it..NO Nic Cage as Superman either!!
-
This all started when I saw a Talkback stating that LOTR of not literature because apparently it has to many stereotypes. Then somebody else wrote a Talkback stating that LOTR was literature but had flawed prose and there were problems with the storytelling. I would just like to say that LOTR is literature, it is a brilliantly written *masterpiece* and is one of the most tightly written epic sagas in history. You may think I am just a fanboy who knows nothing about literature... if you are going to stoop to that level I will just say... I am also an admirer of the works of Proust and Joseph Heller and a college level literature student. By the way that last comment was only for those who doubted my knowledge of literature... for the rest of you... I apologise for being arrogant, if you thought I was. I would also like to say that the fact that an Amazon poll ranked LOTR at number one is not the reason I like it.
To that person who's family and friends have never heard of LOTR... where do you live? I would love to know what literature they have heard of.
Everyone is right... you cannot
compare LOTR and SPIDEY... the only reason people are is because they may be released at the same time. I am sure that both will be major successes whenever they are released. Do not kid yourself... LOTR as a book is massive... it will be massive as a trilogy and make an awesome amount. There have been many complaints but I think this has been a brilliant Talkback. -
Um, Hi. Am I the only person who isn't very interested at all in either of these films? Granted, LOTR is a good series of books, but still... even with that trailer, it still sounds rather ridiculous. If studios can butcher classics like "Catch- 22", "Lolita" (Better books than LOTR, in my opinion), why does anybody think LOTR won't be a sub- par film? And to that point, why are we speculating so harshly on films that don't even exist yet? Which brings me to Spider- Man. Once again, we have speculation on a film which doesn't even have actors, or, from what I've heard, a finished script. So what's all the fuss? And why do we, the fans, really care how much money a film makes as long as it's good? "Being John Malkvitch", "Fight Club", "American Psycho" and "Out of Sight" are three excellent films that made dick, and yet each has earned what I feel is something better than good box- office: respect. So go on and live your lives, for Pete's sake. Go do something. It's a year and a half until these films come out. Do you really want to spend it bitching over something you can't controll anyway?
-
The brilliant success of spiderman will mean a new evil dead
-
In terms of enjoyment it really doesn't matter how much the film makes... the main point is that they make a good film. And I do not see how you could make a good SPIDEY or LOTR film without blowing all box office records... they will do well no matter how good they are. The importance of money only comes into it if you think of followups. If SPIDEY flops (or X-MEN for that matter) no studio will take a comics movie seriously again. As for LOTR... if it does badly it will tarnish the reputation of fantasy movies forever. Having said that... I have no doubt both will be massive. And Patrick... do I want to argue about it for a year and a half? YES. If you have nowhere to rant it does you no good at all.
-
God Harry you're a sly bastard, aint ya? By simply mentioning LOTR at the end of a piece of non-news like this, you triggered one of the most pointless talk backs in recent memory. LOTR vs.Spiderman!!?? Sweet Jesus......I KNOW your screaming with laughter reading this mountain of toss.
-
C'mon, we all know we're just marking time until the vitrol spills on the next Battlefield Earth talkback. Harry! Harry you cruel bastard, you promised us more Battlefield Earth! Something! Anything! Make it up, post a picture of the boots again and a caption reading "yep, he's still wearing this in the film." As a business man, you gotta know those talkbacks are fertile breeding grounds for repeat hits on the site. Oh, and Spiderman v. LOTR? How would one even begin trying to find the basis for the comparison of the two films? Pure box office receipts? Right there you've likely doomed both to artistic ground shared by Titanic and The Phantom Menace. The horror!
-
Pardon me for saying so but, this has to be the most inane debate I have ever heard. They will both do just fine at the box office.
-
As one of the first people who posted on the subject up the top of the list I find it odd the direction this talkback has gone. The LOTR v Spiderman debate shouldn't be about which is better (everyone is entitled to their opinion on that) but why they are being released when they are and if that is smart thinking on the studios part. LOTR has been positioned at the tail end of the year for a very specific purpose....New Line wants those little Gold Guys and lots of them. LOTR is being positioned to make a big Oscar run for all the tech Oscars with maybe a couple of acting nominations (its an ensemble so they probably wont win for acting but a nomination is what New Lines aiming for), Directing, Adapted Screenplay, Costumes, etc get the drift. This is New Lines big roll of the dice....they know that it will make cash and have legs so what they really want is a s&^%load of Gold Guys. Spiderman wants to make cash....that simple. If Spidey got a couple of technical Oscar nods the studio would be ecstatic but thats not really what this film is about from a studio point of view which is why the Fall placement is ominous for Spiderman...Fall is not traditional action film territory so they need to break with tradition to go way over the low three figure mark b4 LOTR rolls in and dominates the X-Mas-January period. LOTR will probably have a fairly clear run from X-mas to late Feb early March in which to make its cash but Spidey is gonna have to make money and make money fast to turn a significant profit b4 LOTR and whatever else is released at X-mas swamps it. As to the debate on the merits of the projects... I love comics and I hope any comic project works but right at the moment the Spidey franchise is at a real creative low...it sells a lot less than X-men or even other Marvel staples like Avengers and creativly they have hit a brick wall due to comics refusal to let characters age...Batman has been about 35 for 50 years and Spiderman is going to be about 25 forever....it kind of hinders character progression, the team books get round this by changing characters but solo books are kind of stuck. LOTR didn't just top the Amazon poll but multiple other polls throughout the Western world for the book of the century...like it or loathe it their is no doubting its base popularity. I hope both projects turn out wonderful films because I dearly love them both but I'm worried at the thinking behind Spidey at the moment.
-
The animated HOBBIT was not made by Ralph Bakshi; that was Rankin and Bass. Bakshi made the first LORD OF THE RINGS movie (also animated), covering about a half of the total trilogy. He had planned to make a second film to finish out the story but was not able to secure funding. Rankin and Bass came along and made THE RETURN OF THE KING that took up where the Bakshi one left off. The Rankin and Bass films are notable for really crappy animation and stupid songs, while the Bakshi one is memorable for its rotascoping technique (please don't tell me I have to explain what that is). I know, you're thinking, "How refreshing to read a posting containing hard fact instead of uninformed idiotic opinion."
While we're on the subject, I find it almost impossible to believe that anyone in the English-speaking world has not heard of LORD OF THE RINGS (unless he is someone really young who doesn't know anything yet about the world of books). I mean, it's one of the most famous and highly regarded works of fantasy ever published. The poster whose parents and friends had never heard of it must live in West Virginia or Idaho or somewhere. -
We all want to see the (actually, make that "a") Spider-Man movie... but does anyone else think that their gunning for a fall -rather than summer or Christmas - release suggest that they already don't regard it as a major, "event" movie?
-
There've been a few people here who keep saying that Spidey has greater name recognition than LOTR, and that young kids will not know what LOTR is, and therefore will not see the movie. Did any of the "young kids" know what "The Matrix" was before they saw that? Nope, and it didn't stop 'em from going to see it, because in the ads it looked like a cool flick, and they kept going back to see it because it delivered on it's promise of a cool flick. Hence, a blockbuster that had no previous name-recognition with any audience of any age group, much less just no name-recognition with the young people. Both of these flicks are going to be cool-looking enough to entice most average people to go out and see them once. If they're both well done movies, people will keep going back to see them. And name recognition won't have anything to do with it. Personally, though, I get the feeling that LOTR is going to come out on top. This is a project that is reeks of being one of those projects of love, and if you haven't seen the preview that's up at the LOTR website, then you can't understand it. Marvel and Sony just seem to be interested in pushing Spidey through as fast as possible, whereas the LOTR project has been in development for years now. What's the old saying, haste makes waste? I certainly hope it doesn't waste Spidey, but I really don't get good vibrations about him slugging it out with the incredible CGI in LOTR. And as other people have said, America and the world has seen plenty of superhero movies, some well done, some not at this point. But from what I've seen of LOTR, the world's never seen anything like this. I've got a feeling that LOTR is going to be the original STAR WARS all over again, and that Sony would be doing themselves a favor by taking their time with Spidey instead of looking for the relatively quick buck. I think a Thanksgiving '02 release would be much more to Spidey's benefit, but you know it's not going to happen like that.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- THE EXORCIST Is Being Remade... -- 226 total posts 225 posts
- UPDATE!! What The Hell Happened With G.I. JOE: RETALIATION?! -- 215 total posts 215 posts
- Quint has seen the brand new Jaws restoration and demands that Universal do a wide theatrical rerelease this summer! -- 172 total posts 172 posts
- THE DARK KNIGHT RISES TV Spot Has New Footage And Dialogue! UPDATED To Add Second Spot! -- 328 total posts 168 posts
- Remember when I said I’d kill The Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day last? I lied. -- 161 total posts 161 posts
- The day we've all been waiting for has arrived...IN THE ARMY NOW II is in the works! -- 81 total posts 81 posts
- A New Clip From PROMETHEUS!! Charlize And Fassbender Talking About...Something (?)... -- 80 total posts 80 posts
- AIN'T IT COOL with Harry Knowles: Episode VIII: John Landis, Carroll Spinney (Oscar the Grouch and Big Bird), MONSTERPALOOZA, And More!! -- 78 total posts 78 posts
- Gary Oldman Joins The ROBOCOP Remake! -- 150 total posts 74 posts
- G.I. JOE: RETALIATION Delayed Nine Months...Thanks To A Force More Sinister Than Cobra!! -- 280 total posts 66 posts