About this Spiderman reboot, what are people thinking? Spiderman 3 killed it in theaters. People genuinely liked it, even though I felt it dragged a bit at times. What is the point of this reboot? Isn't this kind of thing reserved for movies that sucked? Not only that but they may be dropping Mary Jane from the new Spiderman movie, which just doesn't make sense to me.
The reason I'm most mad is because they just introduced Venom in the last one, who is amazing, and it opened up the door for Carnage.... Now how long am I going to have to wait for these villains to reappear?
Yeah, the hate for Spider Man 3 is impressive. I'm not gonna lie, I loved the film, but it's easily the weakest of the trilogy.
I didn't like how it dragged in the middle when Peter was all getting egotistical, but I loved the whole venom thing... was looking forward to him being the next big villain.
The stunts in that bar were fun to watch. The sequence as a whole was probably too similar to fits he'd thrown in earlier chapters.
(Not to say that it wasn't effective then. Just repetitive in part 3.)
They rebooted it so they don't have to keep trying to convince the original cast to come back.
There's one hole in every revolution, large or small. And it's one word long.. people. No matter how big the idea they all stand under, people are small and weak and cheap and frightened. It's people that kill every revolution.
I saw Spiderman 3, but I barely remember any of it. Which isn't a good thing, I suppose.
I was just thinking the same thing, i know i have seen it. But i am looking all the comments and going..... Venom? who that then???
Originally Posted by OchrisO
They rebooted it so they don't have to keep trying to convince the original cast to come back.
Maybe its time for a complete clean sweep and start again. Personally i think they should leave it a few more years, there are other heroes out there after all
And anyway, do we have to have so many endless franchise series? I know my heart would not be broken if we did not get any more Spider-Man movies to go with the ones that already exist.
(BTW, all you guys spelling it that way keeps reminding me of the joke once made on Friends where they pronounced it with a Jewish accent. "Oh, Mr. Spiderman! So good to see you." lol )
And anyway, do we have to have so many endless franchise series? I know my heart would not be broken if we did not get any more Spider-Man movies to go with the ones that already exist.
(BTW, all you guys spelling it that way keeps reminding me of the joke once made on Friends where they pronounced it with a Jewish accent. "Oh, Mr. Spiderman! So good to see you." lol )
I love franchise series. I like them on many levels. I like watching TV shows that have many seasons to them. I like book series that go on and on as well, and I wish there were more movies series out there that I liked. I think it's because I like attachment to characters, and just 'knowing' them for a two hour movie makes it hard for me to feel invested in them.
It was a great movie. I had no idea he died so young. I mean, I knew he was young, but I thought he was in his early 20's or so, not 17. I also had no idea he'd only been famous for a couple months before it happened. So so tragic.
I am Daenerys Stormborn and I will take what is mine. With fire and blood.
It was ok, i admit i zoned out half way through but the ending brought me right back. I am unsure if it is a cultural thing, but for me Harry Brown was a much stronger film. I have lived with the gangs that were potrayed in HB, and the grittiness and depression of that film stayed with me a long long time after i had watched it
whereas GT seemed beyond my immediate knowledge, and so therefore still seemed that in belonged in the realms of the Hollywood film, i am sure that someone here will disagree with me and tell me that is it very realistic (as i said it comes to cultural differences)
what i liked (and that really is the wrong word, i should say what struck me) with HB was the sheer hopelessness that HB felt, the size of the problems that he had to overcome and the depressive state of the estate that he lived on
whereas with GT, i didnt feel that - it was still a Clint Eastwood film, and the whole 'i have a gun pointed in your face wiseass' ooo look clint eastwood is still a badass.
BUT....... the ending
Spoiler:
was way above my expectations and i can honestly say it blew me away, i was fully expecting the whole 'clint eastwood is a badass' to carry through, so when he sacrificed himself so that those two kids could have a better life, well i must say i nearly welled up
it was this ending that lifted the film from mediocre to wonderful.
btw in other news - hubbi just started reading the Dark tower and mentioned during the film that Clint eastwood would make a good roland
It was ok, i admit i zoned out half way through but the ending brought me right back. I am unsure if it is a cultural thing, but for me Harry Brown was a much stronger film. I have lived with the gangs that were potrayed in HB, and the grittiness and depression of that film stayed with me a long long time after i had watched it
whereas GT seemed beyond my immediate knowledge, and so therefore still seemed that in belonged in the realms of the Hollywood film, i am sure that someone here will disagree with me and tell me that is it very realistic (as i said it comes to cultural differences)
what i liked (and that really is the wrong word, i should say what struck me) with HB was the sheer hopelessness that HB felt, the size of the problems that he had to overcome and the depressive state of the estate that he lived on
whereas with GT, i didnt feel that - it was still a Clint Eastwood film, and the whole 'i have a gun pointed in your face wiseass' ooo look clint eastwood is still a badass.
BUT....... the ending
Spoiler:
was way above my expectations and i can honestly say it blew me away, i was fully expecting the whole 'clint eastwood is a badass' to carry through, so when he sacrificed himself so that those two kids could have a better life, well i must say i nearly welled up
it was this ending that lifted the film from mediocre to wonderful.
btw in other news - hubbi just started reading the Dark tower and mentioned during the film that Clint eastwood would make a good roland
I liked that movie a lot.
Spoiler:
I liked how he gave that kid his car too.
I agree with the Clint Eastwood thing and Roland, I've stated it several times in the thread about who would play who in DT movie. And it's mainly because King stated I think that he based Roland (or Gunlingers) on Clint Eastwood in The Good The Bad and The Ugly. However, I think through out the book series you get a Roland at different ages, and I think Eastwood would be a great Roland at the ending of the story. 2cents.
The Tardis (Time And Relative Dimension(s) In Space) duh!
There's one hole in every revolution, large or small. And it's one word long.. people. No matter how big the idea they all stand under, people are small and weak and cheap and frightened. It's people that kill every revolution.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by feverishparade
Venom could have been done better...
