Cube Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Oh, I forgot to mention - the whole emo-parker bit was truly awful. edit: In fact, I think it's the most unrealistic/unbelievable thing in the whole film....and I'm studying physics at university.
Haver Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Don't be all in his face for being young. I would rather him tell the truth than fake some sort of wisdom.
Tellyn Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 EDIT: Oh wait.. you're 15. Which means what, exactly? I wonder if we'll get a plotline where the Stacey's get murdered, seeing as the Gwen Stacey murder scene was done on MJ in the first movie?
rokhed00 Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 I hope 4 (if done by the same people, cast & crew etc) will correct some of the silliness of this installment. It won't, word is Carnage will be one of the villains, along with the long awaited Lizard.
Hero-of-Time Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 and did anyone else think the dance scene was just a total rip from Anchorman? Funny you said that because when me and my mates were coming home I said that during that corny scene I expected Ron Burgundy to appear with his jazz flute
Platty Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Just got back from seeing it and thought was brilliant, absolutely loved it. I agree with some people and that I would have liked more Venom but it was still good. I enjoyed the funny moments aswell, pretty good especially the french waiter Also sitting a few rows in front of me was Hermann Hreidarsson who plays for Charlton with his bird!
mcj metroid Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Well....Spider-Man 3 wasn't as bad as people made it out to be. It's still a pretty good film. Just had a bit too much going on. Also, it seemed to introduce Gwen's Dad (Dr. Cochrane!!!!) like he was going to be quite important, then mostly forgot about him. Batman Forever is the second best Batman film, better than the first 2.....(Batman and Robin, however, was a complete pile of shit). And you missed Ghost Rider...that is THE worst film ever. i agree with ghost rider but batman forever was NOT i mean NOT and this is FACT not better than batman 1 and returns. FACT!
Mokong Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Which means what, exactly? I wonder if we'll get a plotline where the Stacey's get murdered, seeing as the Gwen Stacey murder scene was done on MJ in the first movie? I wouldn't see much point, in the comics it was a major point in Peters life, as Gwen was his first love, (he wasn't childhood friends with MJ like he is in the films), would killing her in the movies now have as much impact on Peter? Unless he was put in a situation where he had to choose MJ or Gwen, and he goes for MJ, then is crushed by guilt, with flash backs of the 1st film, when it was MJ or a bunch of Kids and he managed to save both. Actually it would have been much better if they introduced Falicia Hardy(sp?) in part 3 not Gwen, that way they have themsleves set up to introduce Blackcat at some point. It won't, word is Carnage will be one of the villains, along with the long awaited Lizard. I would love to see carnage, but i think it would be way too soon to bring him in now. I would like to see them somehow bring back Venom, so that they could do him right this time and make him the main villain, with the end battle happening near a shuttle launch and Spiderman managing to send the symbiote back into space like in the cartoon. Then in part 5 finally have Lizard make his long awaited appearance. During the course of 5 Spiderman catches a small time criminal by the name of "Cassidy". Then in 6 the symbiote somehow gets back to earth, and it has replicated creating a 2nd Symbiote. And Peter then has to deal with both Venom and Carnage to perfectly round off the 2nd trilogy. It's the perfect way to do the next 3, so perfect that Hollywood will be too stupid to see it and we could see Spiderman go the way of Batman and Superman
Jack Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 edit: In fact, I think it's the most unrealistic/unbelievable thing in the whole film....and I'm studying physics at university. I take it you haven't been to any indie clubs recently. The places are packed with lanky guys awkwardly dancing in a way they think's cool, exactly like Peter does.
Mokong Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Great review of the film here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SBiqPV8uPA Also it brought up something I never noticed, while Sandmans "transformation" scene was great, did anyone else think it made no sense? Like here's a bunch of scientists working on a highly dangerous experiment, where do they choose to conduct it? In an open field with the only thing keeping people out is a non-electrified fence with a bit of barbwire on top. Shouldn't they be doing their work in a place where they have total control of the surroundings to prevent any foreign objects interfering with their experiment. And when Flint falls in, they know something is there, and all they do is say "oh is probably a bird, it'll fly away", did they not even have cameras monitoring the project? WTF? Does Stan Lee have have any influeance with these films, i find it hard to believe he would be happy with how this film turned out.
Slaggis Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Great review of the film here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SBiqPV8uPA Also it brought up something I never noticed, while Sandmans "transformation" scene was great, did anyone else think it made no sense? Like here's a bunch of scientists working on a highly dangerous experiment, where do they choose to conduct it? In an open field with the only thing keeping people out is a non-electrified fence with a bit of barbwire on top. Shouldn't they be doing their work in a place where they have total control of the surroundings to prevent any foreign objects interfering with their experiment. And when Flint falls in, they know something is there, and all they do is say "oh is probably a bird, it'll fly away", did they not even have cameras monitoring the project? WTF? Does Stan Lee have have any influeance with these films, i find it hard to believe he would be happy with how this film turned out. People need to stop over analising the film, or any film thats hyped for that matter. Its just a movie, something to watch, escapism etc. Stop picking on every little thing.
Haver Posted May 10, 2007 Posted May 10, 2007 Just a movie! JUST A MOVIE! Haggis my lad. Dangerous words! "On occasion we read or see works of excellence, but for the most part, we weary of searching newspaper ads, video shops, and TV listings for something of quality, of putting down novels half-read, of slipping out of plays at the intermission, of walking out of films soothing our disappointment with "But it was beautifully photographed..." The art of story is in decay, and as Aristotle observed twenty-three hundred years ago, when storytelling goes bad, the result is decadence." Robert McKee!
Chris the great Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 its really getting to be rather mental, people are told they can't say its the worst super hero film. maybe in their opinion it is, it is rather ghastly after all, though not as bad as hulk, which really shouldent be called a movie
Cube Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 People need to stop over analising the film, or any film thats hyped for that matter. Its just a movie, something to watch, escapism etc. Stop picking on every little thing. Nitpicking on a film/game/album/etc is half the fun. More than half in some cases.
Jamba Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Well if they do bring Venom back (which I'm feeling that they will) can they just do it properly this time please?
LegoMan1031 Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Well there is still a sample of Venom in Dr Conners lab isn't there.... Is it not possbile that it could escape and 'grow' to bring Venom back?
Cube Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Well there is still a sample of Venom in Dr Conners lab isn't there.... Is it not possbile that it could escape and 'grow' to bring Venom back? Isn't Eddie Venom, though? And Eddie is now dead because Spiderman was too idiotic to use his webs to stop him running into the bomb. (On that matter...Spiderman using bombs just doesn't seem right...)
LegoMan1031 Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Isn't Eddie Venom, though? And Eddie is now dead because Spiderman was too idiotic to use his webs to stop him running into the bomb. (On that matter...Spiderman using bombs just doesn't seem right...) Yer good point. Suppose if they really wanted that character back though they would just make something up with the synboate attaching itself to some other poor bugger, If they really want to im sure they will think of something.
Kav Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Can't be Venom without Brock! It's just not right! I'm hoping he returns, they seriously didn't do his character any justice at all!
Hellfire Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Parker wasn't emo at all. Having your hair down and dressing in black doesn't make you emo. In fact he was totally not emo.
Cube Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Parker wasn't emo at all. Having your hair down and dressing in black doesn't make you emo. In fact he was totally not emo. He's more "Emo" than he is "more aggressive" or "evil" (except for when he pays Harry a visit, that was a great scene).
McPhee Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Can't be Venom without Brock! It's just not right! There is one other... TBH i think Broc is well and truly dead. If they can bring him back then they can (and should) bring back Norman Osbourne instead
Hellfire Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 He's more "Emo" than he is "more aggressive" or "evil" (except for when he pays Harry a visit, that was a great scene). Things don't need to be that black and white. You aren't either agressive or emo. The guy was dancing and flirting with people how the hell is that emo?
Cube Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Things don't need to be that black and white. You aren't either agressive or emo. The guy was dancing and flirting with people how the hell is that emo? I'm not saying it is - it's "emo-Peter" is just a easy way to describe him (from sterotypical views of hair/clothes style). Still, that whole section just didn't suit the movie at all - It's like it was written for a Disney musical. The Eddie Brock "Fake Picture" scene and "dark-Peter's" encounter with Harry were both wonderfully done, the rest of that section was truly awful.
Monopolyman Posted May 11, 2007 Posted May 11, 2007 Yeah, the first hour and a half was solid, fair enough. That does not hide the fact possibly the greatest spidey villan was killed off by metal poles, shamefull. Yar, that was terrible. I also thought how they resolved the whole Sandman thing was terrible as well. Actually, I thought it was a decent film, but not great. But then again, I'm not really a comic-book geek, so I can't really compare the film to comic books. But I thought that the film had too many sub-plots. They could have done without a couple or just shorten them a bit. That was one of the very few problems I had with Spiderman 2, but at leasting SM2, there was one storyline they kept focus on. In SM3, I didn't know what the hell was going on until the end of the movie, which was pretty meh, as I said above. Also, it got way too cheesy in some parts, for example... When MJ dumps peter on the bridge There were some decent parts though. I actually liked the whole darker spiderman thing, as well as the New Goblin moments.
Recommended Posts