I hear Chabon also pitched a Fantastic Four movie. It would have taken place in a retro-futuristic comic book New York. Sounds pretty cool. Better than what the suits came up with.

"It's as though we were made for each other. Beauty and the Beast. Of course, if anyone else calls you 'beast' I'll rip their lungs out."

Anyway, the landlord's daughter had a superior appearance in 3. "Why don't you go make me some."

Somebody has got to make the Walon Green & Gary Goldman revised draft of Crusade back from 1993. And now is the perfect time to do so. I read it a little while back and it would make a fantastic movie if done right. Arnie's too old to play Hagen, but you could easily get Gerard Butler to play the role. And please, get Paul Verhoeven to do it.

BTW, if you want to read the "Crusade" script, it's available for purchase over at scriptcity.com. Normally I wouldn't suggest buying an unproduced script, but in this case definitely make an exception. Trust me. It's a great story and well worth the money.

I've gone into this before. My biggest problem is that if you keep count, Batman kills more innocent people than the Joker. But then there's Jack Nicholson basically playing himself in white makeup. His Joker was terrible. He chewed the scenery as if it were a Laker Girl's ass.

And Gotham looked re-fucking-diculous.

Of course, Burton managed to top himself by giving us giant penguins and a goo-spewing Danny DeVito in his underwear. Oh, and let's not forget the EVIL CIRCUS. Because He's Tim Burton, and it's SO cool when you take something that seems innocent and make it EVIL.

Man, they can trash the whole lot of 89-90s Batman films. Batman & Robin may have been the worst of them, but when you really look at it, Batman 89 isn't very far from Batman & Robin in camp value. Just because some people get warm fuzzies about it doesn't mean it's any more watchable now.

Burton only recently came back to form with Sweeney Todd. Prior to that, his only good movies have been Ed Wood, Beetlejuice, and Pee-Wee's Big Adventure.

And Hamm is vastly overrated as a writer for comic book movies... He's good at doing a TV Movie summary of a character, but his version always ends up a little campy and dorky.

ZeroCorpse, your Biff manure analogy had me ROFL.

I needed that.

If they had just gotten rid of Venom, then the film would have improved tremendously. Strangely enough, as much as I disliked Venom, I really enjoyed Eddie Brock.

All I know is that I felt betrayed. It's rare that a movie actually makes me feel BETRAYED. Upset, angry, disappointed, or confused? Sure. Betrayed? Nope. But SM3 did it.

I felt like I should go to Sam Raimi's house and ask him if he'd like to give my $8 back, out of basic human decency.

Aside from that, and a few other points, done for pretty sensible reasons - the script WAS used. At least, the story was. I would hardly call it ALTERNATE.

Unless its alternate in the same way that the ALTERNATE ending to Hannibal (and most movies) was alterante... i.e NO FUCKING DIFFERENT.

The Doc Ock/MJ romance was contrived to say the least. I think that MJ latching onto a guy who, on their first date, shows her his "pods" was a stretch. Was MJ lonely? Yeah. Is she a danger-loving freak? Maybe, but it wasn't really explored here. And that's the thing that makes her attraction to Octavius seem so silly. It could have been an interesting aspect of her character to explore (MJ likes 'em strange!) but the script didn't make a good argument for this being the case. And instead, the whole thing played out like a soap opera.

I also think that Octavius' motives were kind of underdeveloped. So, he wants Spider-Man so he can use his immune system? Ehhh. I think the movie's version is more on point with his character trying to achieve a legit breakthrough in science (energy sources) and Spidey was just in his way towards accomplishing that task. And Otto being older (and more of a hero in Parker's eyes) was a better take. And the Harry/Otto relationship really didn't make much sense at all in this script, as opposed to the movie.

What I did like a lot with Chabon's script is that J.J. Jameson was a real piece of shit. This works. In the movie he's just a funny prick. In this script, he's actually a bad guy, which makes for a better conflict.

So, I look at the movie as a significant improvement over Chabon's take overall. If they made his script into a movie, it would have been a good story, but it wouldn't have been nearly as enjoyable as the final product.

Laura Prepon would have been the perfect MJ and I know plenty of people who agree. Although, I fear that once they bring her into the franchise the rest of the cast of That Seventies Show will not be far behind. Ashton Kutcher can be Electro, but since he can't pretend to be anyone but himself his character will still have to pull pranks on people and bang women twice his age.

What a loser!

Peter (cont'd): I'm not Spider-Man.

I think Raimi is making post-modern art in the way that Tarantino was with Kill Bill, but for my money Spiderman 2 feels less like a Frankenstein stitch job than Tarantino's film felt like (although, I did enjoy Kill Bill) and like an original whole.

And Kavalier and Clay too! (Not by the Coens, but paramount, anyway)