Export thread

http://superheroshows.blogspot.com/2011/07/watch-leaked-amazing-spider-man-trailer.html

Watch it while it's here.

Basically: emo emo emo, dark dark dark, brood brood brood. The part of Spider-Man will now be inspired by those Twilight idiots.

That...does not look good. Hopefully the official, non-handycam version of the trailer will look better.

I hope that the actual movie/trailer will be better cause based off of that my excitement has gone down quite a bit.

If only Marvel Productions could get back the rights, we could have Spidey and the Avengers back in the same Universe.....

Oh yeah, and a movie production company that actually knows something about their characters.

looks awesome

fuck the haters

What trailer were you watching? At what point do you think that looks awesome?

Once again, Charlie's probably just going against the grain to troll.

I liked all the first person jumping shots (I am giving the benefit of a doubt that they'll look better on the big screen), and Andrew Garfield looks awesome.

I still stand by the fact that this was a bad idea. The first spider-man was already good, and while it did lose some luster by the 3rd movie, it didn't deserve to get rebooted.

Hmmm not impressed with this yet, but it could be the dark direction of this trailer.
Added at: 11:37

ScytheRexx said:

I still stand by the fact that this was a bad idea. The first spider-man was already good, and while it did lose some luster by the 3rd movie, it didn't deserve to get rebooted.

Click to expand...

It had to be re-booted for Sony Pictures to keep control of the rights, otherwise that Marvel Studios might get them back and make a good adaptation that fit in with all their other franchises.

Eh, to be honest, the more I think about them, Raimi's Spider-Man movies haven't aged well. Especially in comparison to other, better superhero movies out there now.

I'd have to sit down and watch them again to be sure, though. Don't get me wrong. I loved them when they first came out, but I don't think time has been kind to them.

Spider-Man 2 is still the best superhero movie. That doesn't change that Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone can act circles around Tobey Maguire and Kristen Dunst.

ThatNickGuy said:

Once again, Charlie's probably just going against the grain to troll.

Click to expand...

Probably?

I'm really not trolling. I'm a huge Spider-Man fanboy, I would probably go "aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH" if it was a pile of crap sitting on the screen for 0:25 then SPIDER-MAN LOGO.

Sorry Charlie, but it's very much the boy who trolled "Wolf". You've really lost alot of your previous credibility and my respect on film criticism.

I'm not a "Hater". I loved the Spider-Man series. With the exception of Venom/Emo Peter I thought they did the films really well.
I "hate" that Spider-Man cannot join the "Marvel Universe" films because Sony won't let it go.

Money is more important than continuity in the real world. I'm okay with Spider-Man standing on its own and not being part of all those shitty cookie cutter Avengers episodes they trot out as "Feature Films"

I kind of wish they wouldn't feel the need to retell his origin, everybody knows how fucking Spider-Man became Spider-Man. Otherwise, I think it looks pretty good. Can't wait to see Lizard.

Now, I've never really read much of Spider-Man, but wasn't the wall-crawler supposed to be a kind of a trickster character? You know, someone who outwits and out-thinks his enemies, cracking a joke even in the face of complete and utter annihilation? You know, NOT the arachnid version of brooding, boo-hoo, my-parents-are-dead Batman?

North_Ranger said:

Now, I've never really read much of Spider-Man, but wasn't the wall-crawler supposed to be a kind of a trickster character? You know, someone who outwits and out-thinks his enemies, cracking a joke even in the face of complete and utter annihilation? You know, NOT the arachnid version of brooding, boo-hoo, my-parents-are-dead Batman?

Click to expand...

Yeah, when he is Spider-Man. Peter Parker was a whiny bitch. All we see of Spider-Man in that trailer is the first person sequence (which was kind of neat).

Charlie Don't Surf said:

Money is more important than continuity in the real world. I'm okay with Spider-Man standing on its own and not being part of all those shitty cookie cutter Avengers episodes they trot out as "Feature Films"

Click to expand...

See? That's why noone takes anything you say seriously anymore. It's actually really disappointing.

North_Ranger said:

Now, I've never really read much of Spider-Man, but wasn't the wall-crawler supposed to be a kind of a trickster character? You know, someone who outwits and out-thinks his enemies, cracking a joke even in the face of complete and utter annihilation? You know, NOT the arachnid version of brooding, boo-hoo, my-parents-are-dead Batman?

Click to expand...

Yeah, the dark angle is the impression I got from this trailer, which doesn't feel like Spidey. But I am sure there will also be a romantic comedy version of trailer and eventually a kick-ass comic book spectacle trailer... none of them will truly reflect what the film will actually be.

The best rendition of Spidey in decades (including the movies, comics, etc) was the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. Not only was he much less whiney (though still suffered from "Parker Luck") but the manner in which he beat the bad guys wasn't just with his fists. He's still a scientist at heart. Plus, his humour means he's a quick thinker. So a lot of times, he was out-smarting them by thinking right on the spot.

Plus, he was GODDAMN FUNNY as hell.

Like the part where Rhino was trashing the place...and a traffic cone suddenly flips onto his horn.

Spidey: Hey, I got the thing on the thing! What do I win?
Rhino: YOU!!
Spidey: I win me!? That makes no sense.

Shegokigo said:

See? That's why noone takes anything you say seriously anymore. It's actually really disappointing.

Click to expand...

I'm far from the only person that is not impressed with Iron Man/Hulk/Thor/am I forgetting anything?

Maybe so Charlie but it's the way you purposefully troll all the time that just makes trying to actually converse with you always feel pointless.

I know alot of people who hated Moon, Mystic River, Gran Torino, Shawshank Remption, Schindler's List. Does that mean they're horrid movies too?

Lets also keep in mind here people, that a tone set by the trailer may have nothing to do with the actual tone of the movie. It's a trailer, it's meant to SELL the movie not always to accurately represent it.

I'll give this a chance but my expectations aren't going to be high. I like Andrew Garfield so who knows?
Added at: 16:47
What if someone liked Mystic River, Shawshank Redemption, Gran Torino, Iron Man and The Hulk? I mean, what if???

That would pretty much be me Espy.....

Oh I just don't know what to believe anymore. You people and your liking some movies and not liking other movies. It's crazy.

ThatNickGuy said:

The best rendition of Spidey in decades (including the movies, comics, etc) was the Spectacular Spider-Man cartoon. Not only was he much less whiney (though still suffered from "Parker Luck") but the manner in which he beat the bad guys wasn't just with his fists. He's still a scientist at heart. Plus, his humour means he's a quick thinker. So a lot of times, he was out-smarting them by thinking right on the spot.

Plus, he was GODDAMN FUNNY as hell.

Like the part where Rhino was trashing the place...and a traffic cone suddenly flips onto his horn.

Spidey: Hey, I got the thing on the thing! What do I win?
Rhino: YOU!!
Spidey: I win me!? That makes no sense.

Click to expand...

oh agreed. this, a thousand times this. spectacular spider-man was AWESOME. the gangland fight with the opera was incredible, and the eventual fight with venom was done better in a damn animated series than in a several-million dollar movie.

and then it was cancelled after two seasons

I just don't get "movie snobbery" in general. I mean if you dislike a movie, fine. Some people take it too far though. Ex: I can't stand Transformer movies. I will sit and point out the things that I don't like about it. However I won't say it's "trash" or "I'd rather stab myself in the eyes than watch that movie". I also don't judge actors by comparison. Just because one is good doesn't mean the other isn't because he didn't act like the previous or later actor. Just doesn't make sense to me.

I was willing to play along until the first-person sequence. I really hope that's just for the trailer reveal of the costume, because it looked really stupid.

I love Sam Raimi. I like Toby Maguire. The first Spiderman movie was good fun. I'm still going to see the hell out of this, because of all the people involved.

Shegokigo said:

I just don't get "movie snobbery" in general. I mean if you dislike a movie, fine. Some people take it too far though. Ex: I can't stand Transformer movies. I will sit and point out the things that I don't like about it. However I won't say it's "trash" or "I'd rather stab myself in the eyes than watch that movie". I also don't judge actors by comparison. Just because one is good doesn't mean the other isn't because he didn't act like the previous or later actor. Just doesn't make sense to me.

Click to expand...

I think it depends. The second Transformers movie, for example, has absolutely NO redeeming value behind it. There are some movies out there that are total and complete garbage. Of course, I also like Kung Pow and Killer Klowns From Outer Space, so I don't have a lot of room to judge.

That said, I do make fun of friends who will pay money to see the Twilight movies. What I can't stand are these teeny-bopper girls (or like-minded adult women) who believe that "OMG KEWT BOYZ!" means it's a good movie. Ugh. Granted, there are hundreds of movies that use ridiculously sexy women as its only selling point, too. Those are the kind of movies I can't help but shake my head at. If a movie is going to be mindless fun, at least make it more than just ass and cleavage shots.

But yeah, I can't stand snobbery. I can't stand when people turn their nose to a movie or fully support a movie without backing it up with some kind of reason.
Added at: 18:26

Charlie Don't Surf said:

Spider-Man 2 is still the best superhero movie.

Click to expand...

Your opinion. Others would say the same of Superman, Hellboy, Dark Knight, Iron Man, Batman: Return of the Joker, All Star Superman, and a whole host of other movies.

I could say Mystery Men was a great superhero movie, too (which it damn well was) and better than Spider-Man 2 because it didn't have pacing issues. I'm sorry, but Spidey 2 drags on. Like the Transformers movies, it could have cut about half an hour of time and not lost anything.

Each flash of the hands and feet in the 1st person sequence had me thinking the costume visual effects look worse than it did 10 years ago.

At least they're actually doing live stunts with someone in costume. CG Spidey in the older films did not age well.

I was hoping they'd be going for the Ultimate origin or something this go round. Maybe just skip the origin all together. Nope.

Not liking what I'm seeing so far, and I want to like it. But it seems like so far it's just cranking up everything I didn't like about the previous installments, specifically the overly serious tone. Lighthearted, wise-ass spidey is where it's at.


The end sequence did make me realize how cool a Spider-Man alternative costume would've been in Mirror's Edge.

More like Peter Parkour, amirite?

I wonder if I can buy a ticket to just the 2nd half of the movie, after the origins part.

What's disappointing about the re-origin is that I thought I had heard early reports that they were planning on doing the origin ala The Incredible Hulk: skip over it briefly, maybe in the credits, then get to the plot ASAP.

You know what movie did a great reboot?

The TMNT cgi movie a few years ago.

That movie had one of my favorite intros ever:

"YOU KNOW THEY'RE FUCKING TURTLES. SHREDDERS DEAD. LEO SKIPPED TOWN. NOW LETS SEE WHATS UP."
All within the first 5 minutes..

You know what comic (and then movie) did the best origin?

All Star frigging Superman (also known as All Star Superman).

Page 1, 4 panels:
Doomed planet.
Desperate scientists.
Last hope.
Kindly couple.

Boom. Origin out of the way, let's get to the story. Let's do it this time around, too.

Got bit.
Uncle died.
Great responsibility.

Vagabond said:

But it seems like so far it's just cranking up everything I didn't like about the previous installments, specifically the overly serious tone. Lighthearted, wise-ass spidey is where it's at.

Click to expand...

This is a key thing. If they "twilight" him up into a brooding, self-obsessed imbecile, that will actually piss me off. One of the greatest things about the character is how he dealt with the sheer insanity of trying to balance his super-hero life with his crappy living situations using humor and self-deprecation.

Again, it's really hard to discern the films true tone from a little bootlegged teaser. I'm way less concerned with the perceived "tone" of the trailer and more with what others are commenting on, doing another origin story. Gah. Move on guys. It's been done. We get it.

sixpackshaker said:

Each flash of the hands and feet in the 1st person sequence had me thinking the costume visual effects look worse than it did 10 years ago.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you can tell this from a blurry bootleg video on a two inch by three inch screen

I don't think it looks great, but that really doesn't matter since I'm gonna see it no matter what.

Charlie Don't Surf said:

looks awesome

fuck the haters

Click to expand...

I am glad you can tell by a 2x3 inch shakeycam trailer.

"It Stinks!"

sixpackshaker said:

I am glad you can tell by a 2x3 inch shakeycam trailer.

"It Stinks!"

Click to expand...

I'm not making specific observations about the visual effects. That's the rub

Espy said:

Again, it's really hard to discern the films true tone from a little bootlegged teaser.

Click to expand...

Here's a better quality trailer, but you're absolutely right. The movie could end up being completely different from what the trailer is portraying.

Just for comparison though, here's the original theatrical trailer for the 2002 movie.

Sweet, they're making Mirror's Edge: Spider-man Edition? I can't wait to play it.

Oh, what? That's the spider-man reboot? Oh... well then, that looks awful.

And usually I'm the jaded one. You guys are being WAY to hard on a terrible quality bootleg teaser.

Soooo...does an official trailer make things look any more promising for anyone?

Not here. Though I'm not hating the costume design. It's just the way the trailer is portraying everything. Parker's this brooding guy who *CLICHE!!!* draws pictures during class. It's the whole dark, brooding emo crap that I'm not enjoying. We had enough of that to last a lifetime in Spider-Man 3.

Yeah, the official non-crappy version does not much assuage my ambivalence. The Mirror's Edge part actually looks worse now that I can see it better.

Peter may not be emo all the time, hopefully. And while I wish Emma Stone was MJ, she should be a perfectly good Gwen.

I guess to avoid being cliche they should write their characters doing things that people never actually do, then. Otherwise it's probably been done before, and who wants to see that, right?

I'm also not seeing a whole lot of brooding in there, and I'm not sure which part amounts to "emo crap". I guess I should dig deeper, maybe I can twist the stuff being shown to match some preconceived idea about how terrible it's obviously going to be.

Sorry, I guess when I think Peter Parker, I think "nerdy, paying attention science geek", unless he's...I don't know, sketching Spidey costumes? It's just the way it was presented in the trailer. If it's the latter, it sort of makes sense. But the portrayal they show in the trailer makes it look like he's one of those psychopathic dark kids you'd see in a horror movie or something.

It's just the overall presentation that he's this brooding, mysterious teenager. Yeah, he screwed up with Uncle Ben, but he didn't turn into a wishy-washy loner guy.

I guess my beef is that the trailer reminds me too much of Dark Knight. Not in the quality of that amazing movie, but in the darkness. And Spidey...just isn't a dark character. Yeah, he's torn sometimes between his dual lives and having to bail to be Spidey, but he's meant to be this really nice, easy going kid. Spidey's meant to be an escape for him. Sort of like someone goes for a walk to clear their head; he goes web-slinging. Most importantly...he's supposed to be flipping funny. There was nary a single funny thing in that trailer.

As I said, I'm still willing to hold out hope here, but it just doesn't look promising at all.

Also, instead of just attacking what we say, why not tell us what YOU thought?

I agree with TNG on the characterization. I don't dislike this because it's "emo crap." I dislike this version because Peter Parker should not be a quiet loner drawing in the corner. He should be the nerdy klutz who is socially awkward and enthusiastic about science class.

Tress said:

He should be the nerdy klutz who is socially awkward and enthusiastic about science class.

Click to expand...

Amen. Whatever his exact characterization, if he's not a mega-science-geek whose intellectual brilliance and curiosity is overshadowed by his social awkwardness, whether it's overflowing nerditity or emo-loner-whatever, they can go straight to heck. To heck, I say!
Added at: 20:05
Also, cliche doesn't mean been seen before, it means overused to the point where whatever point was being made is lost.

I thought it looked about as good as the 2002 trailer posted a bit earlier - laughably bad at parts, but with the potential for a decent movie mixed in. I don't think there's nearly enough there to reach any conclusions about whether he's brooding, or emo, or a dark character in any way - he looks awkward at a couple of points, but that's about as far as it goes. A lot of the posts here read along the lines of "I'm worried/scared that this movie will go too far from the character I love and I'm reaching to match 5 second clips to those fears". I can't even imagine how you came to the conclusion that he looks like "he's one of those psychopathic dark kids you'd see in a horror movie".

Basically, this is a teaser. There's little to no dialog or character interactions, so any conclusions made on those characters are premature at best. At least wait for a theatrical trailer to start decrying the terrible things they've done.

Exactly, you two. Taking it from the High School setting, his self-esteem is shot from being bullied by the likes of Flash Thompson all day. Spider-Man is his release. Like I said, web-slinging is his equivilent to oging out for a walk to clear your head.

SpecialKO said:

Also, cliche doesn't mean been seen before, it means overused to the point where whatever point was being made is lost.

Click to expand...

And which point is trying to be made by seeing a kid drawing in class, aside from the fact that he's a kid, he's in class, and he's either distracted or bored? And better yet, what's the better way to make that point than showing him drawing?

Vrii said:

I can't even imagine how you came to the conclusion that he looks like "he's one of those psychopathic dark kids you'd see in a horror movie".

Click to expand...

Dude, did you not see the same trailer I did? Stop it at the 45 second point, where he's got his hood up, all bent over like Quasimodo and wildly sketching. That's fucking creepy. Creepy is about the last thing Peter Parker should be portrayed as.

See, I interpret that as focus on what he's doing. I just don't see how drawing in class can be remotely creepy.

It's not just the drawing in class part that's making it creepy. LIke I said, he's haunched over with his hood up. I would seriously steer clear of a kid like that.

Anyway, at this point, we're arguing semantics when it's really a matter of opinion. You're seeing something other than what pretty much everyone else I've talked to or read have been saying. I'll be stepping away from the argument from here on. Have fun, folks.

Because Vrii, whether you feel that way or not, the way it's being portrayed is that he's that "creepy hooded kid" in the corner. That's just the way society labels that "look" and "action". You don't see it that way, but it's the general public that does.

Yep, that ~one second clip in the middle of a teaser trailer is defining of the character for the whole movie. How stupid of me not to make that leap.

That's all we have to go on at the moment.

Until there is more, that's all you can judge on Vrii.

Hence the crux of everything I've posted - this is a teaser trailer, and quite possibly isn't representative of the finished product.

True, but people are going to judge on what they see. It's the way humanity works.

So this thread is about bitching about the trailer, which in turn makes the movie seem to be horrible, which will be bitched about too.

Does that trailer tell me more about the movie, not really, but it does re-enforce that they are going for a darker Parker. Now the movie could come out and he could be the comic-book perfect nerdy Parker.... but that's not what this trailer is portraying.

And it's a teaser trailer, that could very well be intended to draw attention from a different audience than that one that expects the typical Peter Parker. The studio has to feel pretty confident in their ability to draw that audience, one second shots of a raised hood notwithstanding.

Vrii said:

And it's a teaser trailer, that could very well be intended to draw attention from a different audience than that one that expects the typical Peter Parker.

Click to expand...

Yes, that's kind of what TNG was saying in the first place. Hence the Twilight comment.
Added at: 21:34
Or do you think that TNG and most of the folks here are in the Twilight demo?

Just seeing and pointing out the massive overreaction to a couple (one?) very brief shots in what isn't even the theatrical trailer.

Okay, back in.

Brief or not, this is still the studio's first look at this movie. They spend millions on promoting a major movie like this, ensuring that everyone and their dog sees it. The purpose might not be to give you a hint of what the movie is going to be fully like, but it gives you an idea of the direction they're taking the franchise and the character. The company spent millions to show us that THIS is what we're to expect. This is a teaser, but it's a teaser created in a fashion to get us excited about this particular rendition of a major IP.

Going by that logic, then, initial reactions from the vast majority of people I've seen has either been "this looks like crap" and/or Twilight comparisons. Sure, people are going to get what they want from looking at this teaser, but this isn't just a bunch of random shots thrown together and put out there. This was carefully put together by a professional, paid money, after a lot more money was put into deciding just how to promote the movie.

In other words, our reactions are the result of the product that Sony has decided to put out for us to judge.

Vrii said:

Just seeing and pointing out the massive overreaction to a couple (one?) very brief shots in what isn't even the theatrical trailer.

Click to expand...

It's 2.5 minutes long, that's a theatrical trailer. It's not going to be the only trailer, imagine, but it's very much a theatrical one. The TV ones will be much, much shorter.

And I'm truly mystified about the "one brief shot" bit. Like I honestly don't know what to say about that.

The music, the color palette, the hair, his expression, the slo-mo walking in the halls as people look and pull away, the clothing (not just the hoodie), how it looks like it's raining for the entire clip, none of that triggers a thing for you?

SpecialKO said:

Or do you think that TNG and most of the folks here are in the Twilight demo?

Click to expand...

OH DEAR CHRIST NO!!!

SpecialKO said:

It's 2.5 minutes long, that's a theatrical trailer. It's not going to be the only trailer, imagine, but it's very much a theatrical one. The TV ones will be much, much shorter.

And I'm truly mystified about the "one brief shot" bit. Like I honestly don't know what to say about that.

The music, the color palette, the hair, his expression, the slo-mo walking in the halls as people look and pull away, the clothing (not just the hoodie), how it looks like it's raining for the entire clip, none of that triggers a thing for you?

Click to expand...

Yeah this. I especially love that they have a scene at the beginning of the movie where his parents leave him. That's so Batman and so not Spider-man.

Now, I know that in the comic his parents did leave and then died, but in almost all previous origin stories for the character there has been no reason to mention it more than that. In this one we will get a whole scene and probably more about it. That worries me because it's shifting away from Uncle Ben and Aunt May as parental figures if he's always brooding about his real parents.

Ultimately, we'll have to see how they handle it but I feel this bodes badly.

Admittedly, if Marvel had the rights back, they would probably try and work his parents into the origin story, since according to the canon...

A little thread necromancy but I didn't see a need to create a new Spiderman thread. Marvel has released some new photos from the movie. Not a huge fan of the suit. I really liked Raimi's suit. But on a plus side we have webshooters. While McGuire looked like the 60's Peter Parker Garfield looks like the current Peter Parker so I have no issues there.
http://marvel.com/images/gallery/st...ing_spider-man_movie_photos/image/901862/full
http://marvel.com/images/gallery/st...ing_spider-man_movie_photos/image/901865/full

Here are all the images (9 in total)
http://marvel.com/images/gallery/st...amazing_spider-man_movie_photos/image/901865#

Whoa, fuck, what?

Denis Leary is Captain Stacy?
Added at: 18:10
Also, a lot of you making a lot of the trailer. Trailers are about as trustworthy for what the actual tone of a movie will be as a crackhead in a jail cell.

<- is optimistic that it won't be as shitty as Spider-Man 3.

A good/great actor in a perfect role for them doesn't make for a good movie. It might raise hopes, but it doesn't guarantee it'll be great. See also: Michael Chiklis as The Thing in Fantastic Four (one of the few saving graces of those movies), or Colin Farrell as Bullseye in Daredevil.

Also, yes, we're making a lot out of the trailer, but that's all we have to go on right now. Plus, as has been said, a lot of money has been put into this movie to decide not only how to make the movie, but how to promote it. This is the first impression they're choosing to give us and it's not a good sign.

They're not marketing to you though. They know you will show.

Not if they're showing Emo Twilight Peter Parker. At this moment, unless a new trailer surfaces that's vastly different, they don't have my ticket.

I'll say it.

Bullshit.

Don't make empty assumptions. That same assumption means I paid to see Green Lantern or Watchmen (in the latter, I rented it while working at Blockbuster). I did neither.

From the very first trailer, I thought GL looked like crap and I called it correctly. Yet, upon seeing the trailers for Captain America and Thor, I was down for those immediately.

Yet the Watchmen trailer was pretty spectacular (I'd go so far to say that it's one of the best trailers ever made, comic movie or no). So, what bearing do trailers have on whether or not you will watch a movie?

Frankie Williamson said:

They're not marketing to you though. They know you will show.

Click to expand...

Yeah, they're marketing for the Twi-hards.

I waited for Rifftrax to see the Twilight movies and I'll do the same for this. It looks like some good Rifftrax fodder. Did anyone see what the Lizard looks like?

Granted, it probably won't be Spider-man: Turn Off the Dark bad, but that seems to be the angle they want.
Added at: 21:08

Frankie Williamson said:

Yet the Watchmen trailer was pretty spectacular (I'd go so far to say that it's one of the best trailers ever made, comic movie or no). So, what bearing do trailers have on whether or not you will watch a movie?

Click to expand...

Really? I thought the Watchmen trailer sucked. It's what convinced me not to see the movie--all the slo-mo. I knew I didn't want to put up with that for 4 hours, so I didn't bother.

Well, with Watchmen, I had no interest in the movie from the beginning. Then again, I thought using a 90's Smashing Pumpkin song to promote a movie set in the 80's was pretty stupid.

But the GL one was pretty spot-on.

My point is, I'm not the target audience. Not anymore. Five, ten years ago? Sure, I'd probably eat all this crap up with a spoon and love it. I might be a comic book nerd, but I'm an incredibly reader for the big name, mainstream stuff. And right now, this movie is being promoted as a dark movie, which the Spidey franchise has had more than enough of. Spider-Man is not Batman.

And finally, I sure as hell don't appreciate being called on non-existent bullshit. When I say they don't have my ticket, I mean it. They don't.

Wow, the exact same argument playing out again in the same thread.

Am I the only person that really liked Watchmen?

I liked it too. I could have done without the goofy action sequences though.

Vagabond said:

I was hoping they'd be going for the Ultimate origin.

Click to expand...

The Ultimate origin was pretty much the same except OSBORNE... which was lame, just like the 1st time they made Normy be behind everything with the Clone Saga clusterfuck...

And then he made Osborne be a more interesting villain then GG... by making GG a lame Hulk ripoff that could throw fireballs...


...


Anyhow, the trailer looks a lot better then i was expecting after hearing your comments on it...
Added at: 07:48

Ravenpoe said:

Am I the only person that really liked Watchmen?

Click to expand...

I found that the fact they couldn't decide if they wanted to be a mainstream film or an good adaptation of the comic is what made it meh.

Vrii said:

Wow, the exact same argument playing out again in the same thread.

Click to expand...

Not really. I took more offence to being called out on non-existent bullshit than arguing about the trailer again.

And you were called out on the bullshit, real or not, after making exactly the same arguments you did before. That's what I was saying.

Ravenpoe said:

Am I the only person that really liked Watchmen?

Click to expand...

Now you might be. I remember when it first came out I was one of the few people on here who didn't like it.

Frankly I don't care about this movie. Only reason it's being made is because the Marvel Studios movies have been successful and now Sony doesn't want to release the license and give Marvel a chance to make a good Spider-man film. It's also why Fox made first class (which is also why you won't see Quicksilver or Scarlett Witch in the Avengers).

Vrii said:

And you were called out on the bullshit, real or not, after making exactly the same arguments you did before. That's what I was saying.

Click to expand...

No, the bullshit I was "called on" was that I was already a target audience and was going to pay to see it. Which is wrong.

Gentlemen, gentlemen please. I will pirate it and then we can watch it from the comfort of my house with a nice big TV and free popcorn. And if anyone asks, it was for the purposes of mockery (If reviews are bad) and the purposes of 'screwing the man' (if reviews are good). Easy!

I'm going to watch this since I love Spider-Man and fresh takes on the story and pretty much every single actor and the director is an improvement over the original

I just fucking hate the costume. I do. Like, it makes me want to rip my arm off just so I have something to throw at it.

I'm gonna watch it... but I'm gonna be pissed every time the costume is on screen.

Fucking costume.

Charlie Don't Surf said:

I'm going to watch this since I love Spider-Man and fresh takes on the story and pretty much every single actor and the director is an improvement over the original

Click to expand...

James Cromwell > Denis Leary

Other than that, yeah.

ThatNickGuy said:

No, the bullshit I was "called on" was that I was already a target audience and was going to pay to see it. Which is wrong.

Click to expand...

And that still isn't what I said, but by all means carry on.

Calleja said:

I just fucking hate the costume. I do. Like, it makes me want to rip my arm off just so I have something to throw at it.

I'm gonna watch it... but I'm gonna be pissed every time the costume is on screen.

Fucking costume.

Click to expand...

Why?

I am looking at a poster of Spiderman on the wall here at work from a comic, and the costumes look almost identical. This I don't get. (The hate, that is. Not the costumes.)

You're kidding right? Identical? They made it WOW ZANY NEW WITHOUT A WAIST RADICAL GLOVES not to mention added a basketball texture to the whole thing that makes it look like he's about to go to an S&M convention instead of fighting baddies.



Added at: 16:15
Edit: SHIT AND LOOK AT THE NIKE FEET THINGS THEY ADDED WHAT THE HELL!?

The old suit was textured too.





I dunno, I think you're making a mountain out of mole hill. In my opinion. I don't dig the minor changes made to the suit, but it isn't enough to make me angry.

The old suit looked like spandex, not like rubber. It's even shiny, look that the shoulder:

It's possible those shoes are just for the stuntperson and will be digitally magiced out

No, you can see the silver sole things in glimpses at the trailer... if it was to be magicked out they would have at least painted them red and not a LOOK AT ME silver... I hate it almost as much as the new superman costume:



Almost.

Now I remember why Supes wore his underwear on the outside.

And why Spidey's costume always had a red "belt" design thingie... removing them makes both look... wrong.

I'm not crazy about the new Superman outfit, but I wasn't crazy about the Superman Returns one at first, either. After seeing it in motion in the trailer, though, I didn't mind it as much. Same as Thor, funny enough. We haven't seen a lot of Spidey in action, so it might look better in motion.

I reaaaally hope the rubber Spidey thing isn't as obvious in motion, but considering how every promotional shot of the thing seems to make sure you notice it, I doubt it. Rubber Spidey. I think even liked his Iron Spidey costume from the comics more.

I thought Thor looked like the God of the Kaboom Stereo when I first saw the outfit. The Avengers version looks worse.

This thread:

That Thor dude really brings out the gay guy in me, I swear to Odin.

WTF????

Is Superman smuggling red kryptonite in his pants?

I don't remember what red kryptonite did... it gave him a huge package, right?

I'm still not sold on this Spider-Man, like everyone said it looks too dark, and the first time I saw the trailer I was confused because I could almost swear it was just a trailer for the Sam Raimi one with one or two new shots added.
But I will probably still see it, assuming any of my friends are interested.

Calleja said:

And why Spidey's costume always had a red "belt" design thingie... removing them makes both look... wrong.

Click to expand...

Yeah, why do they keep removing the belt... it just doesn't look good...

Hell, i dislike the belt design the comic version uses atm, but i'm glad it's there...

I think they have to go with the rubberized suits because we would all make fun of men running around in tights. Rubberized suit can be written off as a Kevlar-type protective thing. Tights aren't acceptable unless they intend to break out in song and dance at some point, and I think we all remember how well that worked in Spiderman 3.

You know, the funny thing is that Supes and co's suits are based on circus strongman suits... and i don't think anyone would make fun of those guys to their faces...

Right, but times have changed. I think that a modern day hero would take a cue from the military or police and wear protective gear, or at least not spandex.

Also, I don't like the idea of Spidey following the strong man path, as he would then be reduced to a bodybuilder outfit, and who wants to see him swinging through Manhattan in a spider-themed banana hammock?

Fun Size said:

Right, but times have changed. I think that a modern day hero would take a cue from the military or police and wear protective gear, or at least not spandex...

Click to expand...

Why would Supes need to wear protective gear?

I'm also having trouble beliving that's the "cloth he was wrapped up in as a child".

Gryfter said:

Why would Supes need to wear protective gear?

Click to expand...

I'm not saying he needs it. I'm saying that, in today's society, one who is theoretically acting on the side of law enforcement might want to look they are with someone.

A better question is why Supes would need to wear a cape? Or a costume in the first place? Why not fight crime in his overalls or cargo pants, where he could still reach his phone? I mean, you clearly have no place for pockets in that thing.

Well, okay...one place, assuming your not using the space that has been so generously allotted for it.

Fun Size said:

Right, but times have changed. I think that a modern day hero would take a cue from the military or police and wear protective gear, or at least not spandex.

Also, I don't like the idea of Spidey following the strong man path, as he would then be reduced to a bodybuilder outfit, and who wants to see him swinging through Manhattan in a spider-themed banana hammock?

Click to expand...

Spidey's costume is supposed to be a pro wrestler's outfit that he just modifies after he leaves the wrestling behind, or atleast thats how they explain how he gets the tights in the Ultimate Universe. Not sure how they explained it in the 616 continuity.

It's the same suit. morso as there's no modification.

I've got a reason for all this superhero costume discussion:

it's because it's a comic book, and if an indestructable super alien that shoots lasers from his eyes wants to wear a cape, well.

Gryfter said:

Why would Supes need to wear protective gear?

Click to expand...

The better question is why is a lame superhero like Superman still around?

Mathias said:

The better question is why is a lame superhero like Superman still around?

Click to expand...

He's still a potential money-making property for WB. I imagine if this new movie doesn't do well, we won't be seeing another for quite some time.

But on a non-financial level, you have something of a point. I like Superman, but as a character, not as a superhero. The best parts of Superman: The Movie show him where he's vulnerable. The people he cares about are his biggest crutch and pretty much his only real weakness as a person with powers far surpassing anyone else's, so his dramatic moments are all I care about. In the super moments, I couldn't give a damn. Unless there's kryptonite involved, he's going to win. And even in cases like Doomsday or if he's fighting Captain Marvel, the city-wide destruction is the interesting part, not the fight itself. I like how in a Spider-man fight, he has certain skills, his opponent has certain skills--interesting things are going to happen. Superman fights tend to be about slugging it out. Even the animated series had to make Superman solving mysteries a la Batman half the time to keep things suspenseful.

Mathias said:

The better question is why is a lame superhero like Superman still around?

Click to expand...

...

ThatNickGuy said:

...

Click to expand...

Dude, Superman is the lamest of all the comic book heroes. Total Mary Sue character. If it wasn't for the qualities that Quotemander mentioned, he'd be a total one dimensional character.

Take Batman for instance. He's at least interesting. He's a fucked in the head vigilantly with serious coping issues. That's why there have been tons more Batman movies that were good over Superman ones. It's easy to come up with a good story for Batman. I like it when the protagonist can actually grow as the story progresses - lose things and in the process become the better person for it. Superman has the power to save everything he loves. He's invulnerable.

I'd go so far as to say that the entire Superman franchise is no better than Twilight. It's built around the same premise. Any obstacle the hero faces is easily subdued and there's no real growth or loss. It's not genuine. Superman for the most part is a totally lame 1950s golden age ideal caricature.

http://www.bamkapow.com/bk-feature-why-superman-will-always-suck-1189-p.html

Mathias said:

http://www.bamkapow.com/bk-feature-why-superman-will-always-suck-1189-p.html

Click to expand...

I like how five of the six comments for that article were from the same Superman fan.

Superman sucks, Spider-Man owns

Terrible comic, just terrible.

You know what else sucks?



My favorite part is where his eye lightning is exploding on the ground behind him.

But honestly, Clone Saga is far more garbagey than One More Day (also garbage).

Fuck, looking stuff up, I had forgotten how many shitty Spider-Man stories there are. Like the one where Norman Osborne was actually having a relationship with Gwen Stacy behind Peter's back, knocked her up, she gave birth to twins and he killed her on the bridge (in the second biggest moment in the history of Spider-Man) so she wouldn't tell him the truth.

Fuck Marvel, Spider-Man stories aren't hard.

I think the point I'm trying to get at is 99% of comics are garbage.

It's amazing what a good writer can do with any limitation on any superhero. I think Robert Kirkman shows with invincible that it's not about how powerful/not powerful a character is, it's about telling a good and compelling story.

Spider-man Clone Saga is what made me stop buying the magazine comics. Probably did me a favor, really.

A character is only as good as the writer. There have been just as many bad or lame Batman stories as there have been Superman or Spider-Man stories. Need I remind people of Azreal-Batman, Ace the Wonder Dog, or the entire homosexual undertone controversy between him and Robin (a theory I don't buy, but it's there). Also, Batman's no more trapped in his own mythology than the other characters. He's not going to develop anymore than the other iconic characters. He's always going to mourn his parents, he'll always outsmart the bad guys, he'll never kill the Joker (and God knows how many times I've heard the "I can't kill them because I'd be one of them..." or "I should have killed the Joker a long time ago.")

My point is, he's just as cliche and stuck in his mythology than Superman.

Superman can be an interesting character, but I'll admit that (like Batman), there's been a lot of people that have written bad stories about him. Of course you're going to think that he's a boyscout and outdated, but that's assuming that a moral character can't exist in this world. I would say Superman should exist moreso in this world because he's such a moral character. He has all this power and yet hasn't been corrupted. He's a country bumpkin just trying to live up to his own reputation. It kills him that he can't save everyone, even though he knows he can't be everywhere all the time.

Also keep in mind that, in my opinion, he's a character loved primarily by people who are a big kid at heart. He's an optimist or an imaginative person's best friend. The kind of person who dreams of flying or maybe playing catch with their super-powered dog in space.

Anyway, I could rant on and on to the point that this becomes ridiculously tl;dr. I'm not going to convince you, just like you won't convince me that Batman isn't just a scarred little boy lashing out a the world with his toys. Yeah, Superman's a boyscout and I love him for it. I could recommend all sorts of things that might, just might, convince you otherwise (All Star Superman, Superman: Secret Identity), but it won't change how you think, so I don't see why you need to bring it up in the first place other than to troll Superman fans like me.

If you want to see a good superman story that touches on this, watch the itsjustsomerandomguy after hours videos.

I know Superman can be interesting, but it was REALLY hard when they had him at smash-an-entire-planet-with-one-punch power levels. When a character is that invincible they can get boring really quickly.

As for the Spider-man movie, I'll wait to hear what the reviews say because I'm just not feeling it from what's been released so far.

The only way the new Superman movie can make Superman interesting is it essentially replaces Superman with:

I wish they'd make The Incredibles 2.

Mathias said:

The only way the new Superman movie can make Superman interesting is it essentially replaces Superman with:

Click to expand...

Yes, Nick, really.

Mr. Incredible has been in ONE movie. ONE appearance. And he's 100x more interesting and three dimensional than Superman.

Here's the thing, Superman CAN be really interesting movie-wise if:

A) They focus on the fact that he has to come to grips that he really is a stranger in a strange land. That's one of the few things that Smallville got right. Also on the fact that he really does have to make tough choices. He can't be everywhere at once and unlike Batman, he can't fall back on the excuse that he's only human.

B) They give him a villain that's actually a threat. Sure Lex is his nemesis, but he's got literally decades worth of villains to chose from. Darksied, Mongul, Parasite, Metallo, Braniac etc.. All have been shown through Superman: TAS and Justice Leage to be villains that both present an actual threat to Superman and can be made into complex characters. Which kind of pisses me off that in the new Superman, they're going with Zod as the villain. We've SEEN that story already. UGH.

C) Show that his infallible morality can be just as much a weakness as it can be a strength. It's the reason that the Joker almost always bests Superman when he blows into Metropolis and Batman has to swoop in to save the day.

Overall, I DO love Superman as a character, but it takes some actual work to write him in a way that's compelling.

Bowielee said:

C) Show that his infallible morality can be just as much a weakness as it can be a strength. It's the reason that the Joker almost always bests Superman when he blows into Metropolis and Batman has to swoop in to save the day.

Click to expand...

I actually did love Joker's shtick in the TAS movie World's Finest. After failing to get Superman on the first try, he just decides to fuck over the whole city.

Mathias said:

Yes, Nick, really.

Mr. Incredible has been in ONE movie. ONE appearance. And he's 100x more interesting and three dimensional than Superman.

Click to expand...

Your opinion. And the more you try to argue about it, the more you're just trolling.

I'm not trying to troll. Don't be a cop-out with that response. You're just too Superman love drunk to realize what a shitty character he is.

Mathias said:

I'm not trying to troll. Don't be a cop-out with that response. You're just too Superman love drunk to realize what a shitty character he is.

Click to expand...

See my post above. Yes you are trolling if all you're doing is tossing out glib dismissals rather than actually making points.

Superman HAS been fleshed out in the years and years of media he's appeared in, but with a character like Superman, you have to really work to write him well. A Batman or Spider-Man story writes itself for the most part. The characters already have built in tension and drama. With Superman, you actually have to get creative.

Also, you fail at trolling as well. Had you used Invincible as your example, it would have been at least accurate.

Bowielee said:

See my post above. Yes you are trolling if all you're doing is tossing out glib dismissals rather than actually making points.

Superman HAS been fleshed out in the years and years of media he's appeared in, but with a character like Superman, you have to really work to write him well. A Batman or Spider-Man story writes itself for the most part. The characters already have built in tension and drama. With Superman, you actually have to get creative.

Click to expand...

And that's fine, I just have yet to see a Superman story get creative enough to make him interesting. Hell, has his personality ever been actually fleshed out? Has he ever gotten the ol' truth, justice, and the American way dick removed from his eyes? Or is the world still black and white to Superman? Bad guys are bad guys; good guys are good. Right? That's what I mean about seeing better character development in the Incredibles.

I have to agree, I find Superman extremely 1 dimensional. That isn't to say the comics are badly written, nor is it to say that Spider-Man comics are better written. Both, as well as Batman and every other superhero to have their own comic, are 90% garbage, 8% mediocrity, and 2% gold. But the characters themselves? Spider-Man and Batman both are far more interesting than Supes. That's just the truth. The only way a character like Superman can work is as part of a team like the JLA, because he is so 1 dimensional the only way to get any conflict of personality is by ACTUALLY including other personalities.

I find Superman boring. But there are other people that do not find Superman boring.

Discuss.

ElJuski said:

I find Superman boring. But there are other people that do not find Superman boring.

Discuss.

Click to expand...

You shouldn't start a sentence with "but". I mean, you know this Juski. YOU KNOW THIS.

Also, Superman can fly AND shoot lasers from his eyes. Thats pretty bad ass. If I was him I wouldn't worry about being interested I'd just be flying around shooting laser beams at things.

Actually, given context, formality, and writer's choice, beginning a sentence with the word 'but' can be very effective.

Bitch.

I've believed in nothing but lies my whole life.

said the smoking baby, under his breath. Casually, with hands shaking a little, he lit another cigarette.

Thread pretty much over people. Ain't gonna get any better than this.

makes me wonder how this all would have transpired if I used a coordinating conjunction instead of two complete sentences.

Mathias said:

And that's fine, I just have yet to see a Superman story get creative enough to make him interesting. Hell, has his personality ever been actually fleshed out? Has he ever gotten the ol' truth, justice, and the American way dick removed from his eyes? Or is the world still black and white to Superman? Bad guys are bad guys; good guys are good. Right? That's what I mean about seeing better character development in the Incredibles.

Click to expand...

Sure he has. It wasn't until during and after WWII that he developed the "American Way" stuff. Before that, when he was less powered, he represented the plight of the working class against factory bosses or the generally downtrodden. He also represented the ideal immigrant, who's able to come from a foreign land and is accepted into American society. In fact, given that he had to hide his "true" self, there's also the metaphor of the Jewish immigrant and anti-semitism. It wasn't until later that he became synonymous with baseball and apple pie.

As I said, he can be stale at times, but so can Batman. It all depends on the writer. The best writers are the ones that realize that he's a guy who, while he tries to do the right thing all the time, he knows he can't always be there in time. He's also a travelled journalist, so he knows that the American Way is just an ideal, not one that may represent the country currently. He doesn't see things in black and white, he just believes that there's good in almost everyone, and believes in second chances. Besides, even though he prides himself on his honesty, he himself sees the irony of lying to everyone to hide his identity.

Anyway, here's some recommended material:

Superman: Secret Identity - While it's meant to take place in "our" world, with someone whose parents cruelly named him Clark Kent, this still captures the mood, ideas (and ideals) that Superman represents.

It's a Bird - This is a mature-readers graphic novel about a writer's attempt to write Superman. He also felt the same way about Superman and that's what he struggles with this assignment. I like this book a lot because it has several pages that are dedicated to studying different aspects of Superman, from his bright primary colours, to the whole "Truth, Justice, and the American Way," etc.

What's So Funny About Truth, Justice, & the American Way - This story was in Action Comics #750. There's a violent group of heroes who make fun of Superman for his old school ways...and Superman proves to them why they might be wrong.

Kingdom Come - This stars several DC characters (including some great Batman moments), but it's mostly focused on Supes. It takes place in the future, where the violent heroes have taken over and the "good" superheroes (Batman included) have disappeared or retired. But then when the violent ones go too far, the classic ones return and wind up clashing their ideals.

All Star Superman - This is probably my highest recommendation. It combines almost all of Superman silly elements (Krypto the superdog, different colours of Kryptonite, etc) and yet tells an incredibly down-to-earth story. It starts out with Superman finding out that he's dying. Does he finally tell Lois his identity? What about his legacy?

EDIT: Negative comments removed as part of the peace treaty.

ThatNickGuy said:

Kingdom Come - This stars several DC characters (including some great Batman moments), but it's mostly focused on Supes. It takes place in the future, where the violent heroes have taken over and the "good" superheroes (Batman included) have disappeared or retired. But then when the violent ones go too far, the classic ones return and wind up clashing their ideals.

Click to expand...

I love this book so much. An incredible story, absolutely gorgeous artwork, and wonderful themes.

Added at: 20:50
I've actually heard awesome things about Kingdom Come, and have been meaning to check it out.

General blanket statement of personal opinion phrased as fact.

Espy said:

General blanket statement of personal opinion phrased as fact.

Click to expand...

ElJuski said:

Added at: 20:50
I've actually heard awesome things about Kingdom Come, and have been meaning to check it out.

Click to expand...

Funny you say that in the same post as a DKR image. In many ways Kingdom Come is a response to the "grimdark" trend that was happening in comics during the 90s.

Mathias said:

Mr. Incredible has been in ONE movie. ONE appearance. And he's 100x more interesting and three dimensional than Superman.

Click to expand...

I'd argue that it's precisely because Superman has had thousands of appearances in various media that he's become such a generic character. Once Superman became an icon, all the times when he was used as just that icon started to drown out the comparatively few times when his character was actually explored.

Maybe it's a weird analogy, but it's like complaining that cheddar cheese is bland and uninteresting because store shelves are stocked with mostly Kraft. Yes, those huge blocks of Kraft mild cheddar cheese are mediocrity sold by the pound. Such blandness meets all the basic criteria to be called cheddar, but has almost nothing of what makes cheese special. However, that doesn't mean that all cheddar cheese is boring.

The same goes for Superman. There are many versions of the character that are bland caricatures, made by the most basic formula and with assembly-line results. That doesn't mean that Superman cannot be, or has not been, an interesting character.

Hey, remember when we were talking about the Spider-Man movie?

Those were good times.

Not really. Kind of exactly the same thing as happened with the Superman conversation, actually.

Mathias said:

Dude, Superman is the lamest of all the comic book heroes. Total Mary Sue character.

Click to expand...

And there we have the real problem...

It's like the World of Cardboard thing at the end of JLU, that wasn't awesome (well the speech itself was nice), that was every Superman story DC thinks is the only acceptable story... Supes get his ass kicked around a few times, then goes SuperSayan and beats up the villain... the only thing that's changed is that they no longer have the same artist do his face no matter who's drawing the comic.

What would have been awesome is that after he finished his speech Darkseid gets up and reminds him he's a damn god of evil and kicks his ass some more... and not just one punch or something, but full on ass kicking... and at the end it turns out Supes has just been distracting him etc.

But that's not how DC wants Superman used... which is why no villain is ever stronger then Supes after their initial appearance...

Supes is the original DBZ syndrome sufferer...


Of course the funny thing is that the Silver Age did have some people beat Supes in strength based combat it seems: http://comiccoverage.typepad.com/comic_coverage/2006/12/cover_to_cover__4.html

Superman took over Spiderman's thread. Superman. . . Spiderman's greatest nemesis. I feel like Superman in one dimensional as well but I love the character much like I loved Hulk Hogan in the 80's. He's the quintessential good guy and there is a place for that. Other characters are more entertaining but I will put up the first two Christopher Reeve Superman movies against 95% of all other comic book movies. Those two movies show that good Superman movies can be made. I agree with finding a new villain. We've seen enough of Lex as the main threat. I have high hopes for the new Superman movie though.

Edit. Removed

EDIT: Removed.

!

The Superman movie that could have saved the franchise. Tim Burton with Nick Cage as Supes. With pic of Nick at the end.

Man Nic was WAY out of it in that picture

Removed by me.

Goodbye, thread.

And now we continue with SPiderman/Superman or whatever the hell this thread was about.

Nick & Matt have been speaking in conversations and we're all cool. Mods didn't intervene and they self-edited their posts.

Nothing to see here but adults having differences and then moving on after talking it out.

That and we're meeting at high noon tomorrow to duel with pistols.

He only thinks I'm counting to 10....

Speaking of Spidey:


Teh ears are too big and the hoodie too small, but otherwise that's a perfect goblin face right there...

Instead they went with the helmet with the mouth always openned... the mouth always being opened annoys me so for some reason...

@Li3n said:

Speaking of Spidey:


the ears are too big and the hoodie too small, but otherwise that's a perfect goblin face right there...

Instead they went with the helmet with the mouth always openned... the mouth always being opened annoys me so for some reason...

Click to expand...

man, how much more awesome would the first movie have been with that for the goblin.

Instead we got Green Power Ranger Goblin.

Holy shit, how do they get that much expression through that much prosthetic?

Ravenpoe said:

Holy shit, how do they get that much expression through that much prosthetic?

Click to expand...

They tried.

ThatNickGuy said:

Anyway, here's some recommended material:

Click to expand...

Maybe it's only because I just got around to reading it this month, but I'd throw Birthright in there as well. It did, what I thought, was a nice job of showing how Superman comes to terms with being not just the Last son of the El family, but of the planet Krypton, and how he honors the planet as a whole. The collection also has a nice afterword explaining how Waid tackles the issue of the bright colors and lack of mask being Superman's offer to the world to accept him, that he has nothing to hide...as opposed to, early on, if Clark Kent was seen using powers, he WAS accused to "hiding out" among the humans and freaking people out.

Man, pre-crisis Supes got his ass kicked more then i tohught: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faora

And Supes not being actually that good at fighting is a great idea... i'd like to see that explorer more, with stuff like a red sun room on the JLI tower where he and Batman would spar to train him and WW teaching him pankration or something...

I dare you to tell me that this doesn't make you feel all warm and schadenfreude-y inside:

ugh, maybe I just flat out don't like classic comic books.

Mathias said:

ugh, maybe I just flat out don't like classic comic books.

Click to expand...

That's my problem. I like the idea of superheroes, and I like certain well-made, critically acclaimed comics, but much like the sci-fi / fantasy genre in general, the bar seems to be pretty fucking low for the writing and production.

Mathias said:

ugh, maybe I just flat out don't like classic comic books.

Click to expand...

Or maybe you just lack the ability to mentally separate good ideas (martial artist kryptonian and a woman kicking Supes ass) from crappy silver age dialogue and sub-par execution...

No bad stories, only bad writters and all that.


And on a side note, i actualyl found Bendis to be the opposite of that... good dialogue (well, as long as he doesn't go the full-bendis-speak) and execution, terrible ideas (Ult Green Goblin)...

@Li3n said:

Or maybe you just lack the ability to mentally separate good ideas (martial artist kryptonian and a woman kicking Supes ass) from crappy silver age dialogue and sub-par execution...

No bad stories, only bad writters and all that.


And on a side note, i actualyl found Bendis to be the opposite of that... good dialogue (well, as long as he doesn't go the full-bendis-speak) and execution, terrible ideas (Ult Green Goblin)...

Click to expand...

Or maybe I lack the ability to enjoy garbage...

essentially what you're saying is that I should enjoy the art and not the story, or enjoy the idea behind the story instead of the story?

So, by your definition Twilight is a good book.

Sorry, I find that good writing is the crux and primary focus of any sort of story telling; everything else comes second.

Mathias said:

So, by your definition Twilight is a good book.

Click to expand...

What exactly about the idea of sparkling stalkers and co-dependant "i'm totally plain but everyone is fawning over me" high-school girls is in any way shape or form good?

Hmmm... i guess i don't agree with the "No bad stories, only bad writers" thing after all... because i don't see how you can make a good story out of that without sarcasm, which kinda changes the whole idea behind the story...

Mathias said:

essentially what you're saying is that I should enjoy the art and not the story, or enjoy the idea behind the story instead of the story?

Click to expand...

Well i don't see how you can say that the idea behind the story isn't part of the story...


As for art... well that can always be enjoyed on it's own, doesn't it?

Mathias said:

Sorry, I find that good writing is the crux and primary focus of any sort of story telling; everything else comes second.

Click to expand...

So as long as you enjoy the prose you would not be bored reading about paint drying for 400 pages? Hell, i once couldn't get past 2 pages of a book i had to read for school that actually started interestingly because they where simply about one guy walking on a town street and looking at the pavement.


Of course one could argue that the idea is also part of writing, as opposed to just the dialogue, and in order for something to be good writing you need all of the parts to be good. And by your earlier comments on Superman's character/personality/persona ruining any good story potential i'd say that was you arguing that too.


Don't get me wrong, i don't think anyone has the right to call that comic i posted "good", i mean it's obviously written for kids under the assumption that is should be as simplistic as possible... but it does have potential... which makes it enjoyable to me without actually having to see it as good.


But i wonder, no guilty pleasures for you at all?

Kind of off-topic from the above discussion, but...

I'm in the minority that loved Superman Returns. Of course, I'm bias. Then again, apparently Quintin Tarrantino considered it the best movie of that year and has (or maybe had) plans to write a long essay defending it. It's sadly yet to see light.

That said, after seeing some of the disastrous things that the Superman movie could have been, I'm more than happy with what we got. First, there's Nicholas Cage, with Tim Burton at the helm. Apparently, the plan was for Superman's powers to not come from the sun, but from his suit. He would have a giant metal "S" as part of the costume, which he could remove, allowing it to morph into various gadgets and weapons...that he would kill with. Yeah.

And then there was this...


So after all that, we finally got Superman Returns. As I said, I'm more than happy with what we got.

That bad movie was better than the stinking pile of sh!t we nearly stepped in...

You could also say the same thing about Green Lantern.

Originally, the plan was to make it a comedy.

Starring Jack Black.

I honestly think that might have been better than the piece of shit the Green Lantern movie was.

@Li3n said:

But i wonder, no guilty pleasures for you at all?

Click to expand...

I have musical guilty pleasures, but I generally don't like to read crap.
Added at: 17:56

ThatNickGuy said:

Kind of off-topic from the above discussion, but...

I'm in the minority that loved Superman Returns. Of course, I'm bias. Then again, apparently Quintin Tarrantino considered it the best movie of that year and has (or maybe had) plans to write a long essay defending it. It's sadly yet to see light.

That said, after seeing some of the disastrous things that the Superman movie could have been, I'm more than happy with what we got. First, there's Nicholas Cage, with Tim Burton at the helm. Apparently, the plan was for Superman's powers to not come from the sun, but from his suit. He would have a giant metal "S" as part of the costume, which he could remove, allowing it to morph into various gadgets and weapons...that he would kill with. Yeah.

And then there was this...


So after all that, we finally got Superman Returns. As I said, I'm more than happy with what we got.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I didn't find Superman Returns to be horrible. I just wish the producers did more homework on the physics involved. I mean I realize the concept of Superman is fiction, but things he does to stuff on Earth could still be grounded in reality. I'm referring specifically to the plane scene.

I can't hate Superman Returns too much because of Kevin Spacey and Parker Posey

Ugh, the "no bad stories" nonsense. Honestly, I just think that comics fans get really thin-skinned about comics, but for the most part, aren't really well-versed in any sort of pop-cultural criticism.

ThatNickGuy said:

apparently Quintin Tarrantino considered it the best movie of that year

Click to expand...

He also really, really, really liked Hostel.

@Li3n said:

Speaking of Spidey:


the ears are too big and the hoodie too small, but otherwise that's a perfect goblin face right there...

Instead they went with the helmet with the mouth always openned... the mouth always being opened annoys me so for some reason...

Click to expand...

This is the Goblin I would have loved to see. Minus the ears and with a hood. Face is perfect.

Frankie Williamson said:

He also really, really, really liked Hostel.

Click to expand...

As a Tarantino fan and even if I wasn't, I completely agree with him. With Hostel and Saw we saw the beautiful birth of Gore Porn.

Your stamp of approval on something like that is like hearing a child molester defend kiddie porn.

Yeah I realized the redundancy after I posted it. *shrug*

You forgot to add Passion of the Christ to the list of Gore/Torture Porn.

I don't know why people are saying the ears are too big on that Goblin. It looks perfect to me, and as for the hood, this was obviously only to test the mask and not the final costumed version (which apparently we'll never see )

ThatNickGuy said:

You forgot to add Passion of the Christ to the list of Gore/Torture Porn.

Click to expand...

Way too much boring for way too little pay off.

Bowielee said:

I don't know why people are saying the ears are too big on that Goblin. It looks perfect to me, and as for the hood, this was obviously only to test the mask and not the final costumed version (which apparently we'll never see )

Click to expand...

I think it's dead on with the old version of Goblin in the comics but it just looks a little too cartoony for my taste. I don't think the mask would lose anything by removing the ears or scaling them down a bit. Even with the ears I'd prefer this version to the Raimi verson.

Mathias said:

I have musical guilty pleasures, but I generally don't like to read crap.

Click to expand...

Now sir, that's just discrimination...

Mathias said:

To be honest, I didn't find Superman Returns to be horrible.

Click to expand...

Oh, now you're just screwing with me...


Of course i wouldn't call it horrible, coz that's something reserved for special ocassions, but damn if it wasn't pretty boring... and Lex again as the villain, give it a rest already, not even Spacey could make it interesting... and then at the end he exibits the classic Superman sueness with the giant kryptonite island...

And Lois hooking up with some guy just to not be a single mother did a disfavour to the character...

Also, they cut this from teh final release, what the hell is wrong with these people:

ElJuski said:

Ugh, the "no bad stories" nonsense. Honestly, I just think that comics fans get really thin-skinned about comics, but for the most part, aren't really well-versed in any sort of pop-cultural criticism.

Click to expand...

You do realise that the "no bad stories" thing doesn't actually imply the work itself is good, actually the opposite, that it's pretty bad, but someone with actual talent could make it good...

Bowielee said:

I don't know why people are saying the ears are too big on that Goblin.

Click to expand...

They look too floppy and fake... not that they sometimes don't in the comics, but that's not a god reason not to fix them...

Plus, in the comics the hat is bigger and fits in better with the big ears...

Look how well the smaler ears work:

I'm pretty sure that hood in the video is just to cover up the animatronics, not what the end character would be wearing.

Bowielee said:

I'm pretty sure that hood in the video is just to cover up the animatronics, not what the end character would be wearing.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but real world physics dictate that any real hats or hoodie would not stay as fluffed up as the comic version... unless they stuff it with something etc, and then making the ears more like in those pics i posted is just as easy...

Superman Returns was pretty horrible. It made Clark a terrible person and deadbeat dad, Lois an absolute moron, and was all a round a much better movie when it was originally made in 1978.

Covar said:

deadbeat dad

Click to expand...

You can't really fault him that as it's obvious he didn't even know he was a dad...

@Li3n said:

You can't really fault him that as it's obvious he didn't even know he was a dad...

Click to expand...

Knocking some one up is not quite up to Supe's moral code. Since he hears EVERYTHING, why did he ignore his child's heartbeat, and run off to the stars...?

Knocking someone up then using a roofie kiss. Of course by the end of the movie he makes the situation right...no wait. That's exactly what he doesn't do.

sixpackshaker said:

Knocking some one up is not quite up to Supe's moral code. Since he hears EVERYTHING, why did he ignore his child's heartbeat, and run off to the stars...?

Click to expand...

He ran off before there was a heartbeat, just a heads up.

sixpackshaker said:

Since he hears EVERYTHING, why did he ignore his child's heartbeat, and run off to the stars...?

Click to expand...

He left in the legal abortion window, before the kid even had a heart?

sixpackshaker said:

Knocking some one up is not quite up to Supe's moral code.

Click to expand...

Meh, since movie supes is ok with making someone forget they had sex by giving them super-kisses that's not even that bad.

I'll just leave this here.

ThatNickGuy said:

Then again, apparently Quintin Tarrantino considered it the best movie of that year and has (or maybe had) plans to write a long essay defending it. It's sadly yet to see light.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised, considering Tarantino hates CGI so much. But regardless, as amazing a filmmaker as he is, he likes a lot of shitty movies. A person can be a master of their craft and still enjoy the same field's garbage. And there's no reason not to; it's just that his opinion doesn't elevate the movie.

I hate that Kevin Spacey as Luthor was wasted there and we won't see him in the role again. Best part of that movie. Second best part was the opening credits, although I think John Ottoman messed up by shortening a certain note-set of the main theme music.

Anyway, this:

Killing two birds with one stone this Cracked article discusses Spiderman (after Civil War) and Superman Returns. Love the idea for Superman Returns. You turn Superman into the villain. He just becomes corrupt with power and the world has to turn to Lex Luthor to save them. And not some stupid mind control from another villain shit but Superman actually going to the dark side on his own.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-biggest-missed-opportunities-in-fiction/

That's not Superman anymore, then.

That's Irredeemable.

That's a pretty good series.