|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 9:57 pm
Angry? How so? Why would Spiderman 3 make you angry? neutral
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 05, 2008 10:44 pm
Um...wow...there are SO many reasons. This'll take a while. And remember that this is just MY personal opinion.....
First of all, Venom (the ORIGINAL Venom, Eddie Brock) is, and always has been since I was about five years old, my favorite comic character of all time. The whole villain to violent hero transition thing, and his powers, not to mention that he basically EATS people....it's just all awesome.
So when I first heard they were FINALLY putting Venom in a Spider-Man movie, I was excited as hell, to say the least. I couldn't wait 'till it came out. I swore that I would see it as soon as possible. I started constantly rambling about how much I wanted to see it, often times running around like a hyperactive seal on crack whilst doing so. It was the cause of many laughs for my friends and the few relatives to whom I still acquiesce to speak to.
So yeah. I was excited. Finally, Venom getting the spotlight he deserved. But yeah...that all came crashing down when I went to see the movie. I'm gonna white this out because there's so much I could go on about, but I don't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen it.
First problem: Most of the entire movie was pointless relationship problems and drama and crap between Peter and M.J. Don't get me wrong, I'm the kind of guy that usually goes "aww" at romantic stories and stuff. I watch Lifetime movies with my sister and I like them, and I have no problem admitting it. But seriously, they dragged it out and made way too big of a deal of it, and my personal feelings were, they should have just gotten over themselves and got married or something.
Then of course, the whole thing with Harry...ugh...Just read the comics. You'll understand. And Gwen Stacy? GWEN STACY??? Argh. Again, read the comics.
But most of the problems I had, were with Venom, of course. I was excited when I saw Eddie. But that faded, because like I said, they dragged the movie on far too long with things that were just...ugh. Then, more than three quarters of the movie gone, they FINALLY give him the symbiote, and I was expecting it to be awesome. But it was just NO. NONONONONONONO! Anyone who is a fan of the comics should understand what I mean. But in case you don't...
Venom is two beings: Eddie and the alien suit. Therefore, he always says "we" instead of "I", "our" instead of "mine", and so on and so forth. Did they put this in the movie? No! I was looking forward to him saying one of his trademark phrases, my favorite of which being "We don't have time for this!", but no, they made him speak normally! WTF? Also, they messed up his suit. They changed the symbol, and they put webs on it. WEBS! Again, I say WTF? And the size. Venom is supposed to be frickin' HUGE, all muscle-y and whatnot. Even before he had the suit, he could lift hundreds of pounds. But they changed all of that in the movie. They basically turned him into a black-suited Spider-Man lookalike with sharp teeth and claws. Grrr.... I could go on and on, but I've already wasted so much space ranting I feel bad. But I will say this: the way they ended it...was just...ugh...Words fail me.
ANYWAY..... Most people, upon hearing me rant about how much I was disappointed by that movie, will just wave it off and say "Oh, well, that's what you get. You let years and years of stupid dorky fandom ruin the movie for you." But no. Just no. The way I see it, seeing the movie ruined the legacy of one of the greatest characters ever created. It is okay as a movie, and I love the soundtrack, and I'm happy they finally decided to do something with Venom. But if they don't fix this whole thing in the next movie (if they even make a next one), I probably won't ever watch another Marvel comic-turned-movie ever again. Yes, I do understand that they change MANY things in the movies based off comics (changing Spider-Man's webs from a scientific invention to an actual power, for example). It's to be expected. I just didn't think they would change it THAT MUCH. But don't let my ranting stop you from seeing it if you haven't yet. It is good as a movie, especially if you've never read the comics. But personally, I only keep the DVD because my niece and nephew like to watch it. Anyway, I'm done wasting space now. Stick a fork in me.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 11:08 am
Firefly FTW. Why is no one mentioning Firefly? He's a reasonable character that could make an appearance in the next Batman movie (flamethrowers on his arms and a jetpack).
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 2:31 pm
Other than firefly, they could probably use Bane, Deadshot, or Hush. Bane because he seems to definitely be realistic, Deadshot because...well, he's just basass, and Hush because he's one of bruce's childhood friends gone insane.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:40 pm
Oh Bane! That guy, is a dreamboat. I really liked Deadshot in Gothom Knights, raise your hand if you've seen that?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 4:50 pm
I have to agree about everything you stated for Spider-man 3.
And the fourth Batman movie was terrible compared to the others, in my opinion. I thought it was really... just... How do I put this?
*"Happy Together" comes on as Rae prances around in a meadow and snowflakes start to fall*
That. o.o
Batman is supposed to be DARK damnit. I think the primary colors for that movie were neon blue, neon pink, and neon green. NEON. Damn them. ._.
I would actually turn off my television rather than just "have it on". That's how much I dislike it. o.o
I actually don't really wanna see Catwoman... Ivy maybe... but Catwoman is overdone...
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 5:32 pm
Thanks, Rae ^_^ I seriously felt bad after ranting about all of that crap, so I added the "it's good just as a movie" thing at the end. Because people usually think I'm an a** when I portray my views on comic book movies gone bad and whatnot.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 06, 2008 5:51 pm
*Pictures Rae prancing around in a snowy meadow and chuckles*
Yea, you're right, cat woman is overdone. However, she is an interesting character, and she'd be fun to see how this NEW batman would respond to her. That's why I personally would have her as a side-villain. But, again, I agree, she is overused, and we need to see some new people in the movies.
My only reserves on Ivy is that she sorta would drag the batman movies way onto the sci-fi side of things, and that's what I think these new batman's have been trying to avoid, and keep realistic in a way.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 3:14 pm
Plant lady is best left for the animated series & I prefre it like that, however if they did Ivy they would after to take everything about her controlling plants out of the way, they could still give her the plant fetish but maybe in a different context, since she's a succubus they could make that as her streetwalker name.
Synopsis of my own Ivy plot: If your still with me on this, hear me out. Pamella Isley, a botanist from Seattle moves to Gothom City in hopes of aiding the wild flowers there (or something). Finding no work to fund her she soon becomes destitute finding hard to even get an average pay roll.
Desperate & hungry, she takes a job as a call girl. Ivy had always been easy on the eyes and found no trouble in finding willing men, the attention was desirable but the work itself had been degrading and insulting , espcially to her harvord education (or whatever). The emotional toil of serving males in such a way had begun to take its effects on her mental state. Degenerated and slightly twisted by this, she poisons them with toxins she had discovered from her work as a plant lady (lol)
Word soon brakes out that a women named Ivy has been drugging her victoms; Dubbing her Poison ivy.
Yeah I agree Rea Batman Forever & Batman & Robin were both really bad films, it was so insulting but at the same time i just love Arni when he says...'what killed the dinosaurs...THE ICE AGE!' i just like how he shouts out the punch line
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:14 pm
If Robin was done right in the new movies it would make for a good story, d**k Grayson just has the stigma of the bad Bat movies about him, so automatically everyone assumes if Robin is added, it'll be bad movie, which isnt nessicarily true...
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 12:39 pm
Yeah, Robin is awesome. Well...the original Robin, I mean. d**k Grayson. I'm not really that big a fan of the other two O.o Still, the third one was pretty awesome in Knightfall, and like I said, I'd love to see a movie of that XP
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:58 pm
I personally would not like to see Robin in any of the new movies AT ALL. I would also not like to see Dr. Fries (A.K.A. Mr. Freeze), Poison Ivy, Solomon Grundy, or any of the other characters that have a particular supernatural or wacky scientific aspect to them. From my point of view, the new line of Batman movies is trying to take to make this much more realistic than it ever was. They want to get the point across that this is present day, and this stuff could actually happen. Now mind you I really did not like the first movie that much because they rather down graded the beloved Scarecrow into a rather pathetic emo-like pretty boy. I always liked the Scarecrow and always thought of him as a current day Dr. Faust who has a fetish for fear, but now I’m just rambling. The point Im trying to get across is that Scarecrow, did have abit of a supernatural aspect to him. (If you have read any of the old comics, you would know why) Now this can be done into a modern style, but its hard and it generally comes out with a very lame villain.
The Joker. He has and always will be my favorite villain of all time. The man was almost an idol to me ( though I never liked his aggression against women or his obsession with money) I just admired the laughter, the fun he had in all the villainous deeds he preformed. That’s what they did in the Dark Knight. They took they key aspect of The Joker and casted aside most of the other stuff. That aspect is laughter. They took that aspect and morphed it, molded it and created it into the dark, realistic thing it should be. There was no chemical bath, no freak accident that made him look like a freak. He’s just a guy who wants to have alittle fun. And let me tell you, he was BRILLIANT! I loved it and would never change it. Every single little piece was absolutely perfect. From his tongue licking quirk, down the little potatoes peeler the police found in his pocket.
That is what I want to see and that is what I believe they should keep on doing. Make the movie as dark and realistic as possible. The Riddler would be perfect for it, Bane would be excellent, and defiantly Hush, and Dr. Hugo Strange. But really that’s just my opinion.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:47 am
Well, you have to remember that even the Joker, Ra's al Ghoul, and two face had somewhat 'super natural' backgrounds, but they were made much more realistic. Joker's face was not chemically bleached, his hair not chemically died green. Ra's, as far as we know, was not hundreds of years old.
If they can real-ify those guys, I'm pretty sure they'd find a way to real-ify the others, ya know?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:22 am
True.... Well, the less the odd background is, the better the character. sweatdrop
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 14, 2008 5:14 pm
Best scene ever!That scene made the movie for me. At first, I didn't like it that much, but then I started reading up on the third film and really thinking about this one and uh... I love it. o.o The Joker... awesome... Poor Ledger. It really was an amazing performance.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|