Anything you want to keep the same? [Archive]

Infinity9999x

01-13-2010, 01:06 AM

This is a reboot. If Sony we're going to keep some things the same, they'd be making a sequel without Raimi, Tobey and Kirsten. This is a reboot, so everything must new. It's a massive cop out to call it a reboot and then keep things the same.

Yeah, and they rebooted Bond but kept the same chick as M. Obviously that blew up in there face. Nobody liked Casino Royale.

You don't throw away people who absolutely nail the role just because you're rebooting. That's stupid. (Unless you find someone better). Recasting Jonah would be a big mistake.

JustABill

01-13-2010, 01:25 AM

If anything probably JK Simmons. Dame Judi Dench stayed for the bond reboot, don't see why he can't stay for this reboot.

hitpehoaos

01-13-2010, 01:52 AM

Yeah, and they rebooted Bond but kept the same chick as M. Obviously that blew up in there face. Nobody liked Casino Royale.

You don't throw away people who absolutely nail the role just because you're rebooting. That's stupid. (Unless you find someone better). Recasting Jonah would be a big mistake.

Are you serious? Casino Royale was one of the best Bond film's ever!

I don't think they should keep anything the same, new approach and new feel is the way to go. Otherwise everything will just seem like a re-hash!

SuperFerret

01-13-2010, 01:54 AM

Casino Royale was a good movie, but far from a Bond movie.

Micah12345

01-13-2010, 01:59 AM

It stars James Bond. It is a James Bond movie.

SuperFerret

01-13-2010, 02:04 AM

It stars a character named James Bond, but nothing about the character evokes the idea of Bond.

JustABill

01-13-2010, 02:14 AM

SuperFerret, what is with you making me do so many moments where I smack my head on my desk to make sure you are serious lately?

01-13-2010, 02:41 AM

Are you serious? Casino Royale was one of the best Bond film's ever!

You need to work on reading sarcasm... ;)

jacobed

01-13-2010, 03:42 AM

Casino Royale was the first movie to get Bond right. All the old movies made him really campy which is the complete opposite of the books. I've read all the books multiple times and Casino Royale got it perfect and it is easily the best bond movie.

craigdbfan

01-13-2010, 04:03 AM

The costume. Minor edits here and there (the eyes and the webbing) but other than that it shouldn't be changed much. The material and design are pretty much perfect.

http://agmetalminer.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/spiderman2.jpg

night0205

01-13-2010, 04:14 AM

The costume does look great. IMO.

R_Hythlodeus

01-13-2010, 04:17 AM

the actors and the director

[A]

01-13-2010, 04:25 AM

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6164/macacojjjameson8301540.jpg (http://img130.imageshack.us/i/macacojjjameson8301540.jpg/)

:word:

DACMAN

01-13-2010, 04:48 AM

Keep the costume. Make some minor changes to it, but nothing big.

Adrian89

01-13-2010, 05:08 AM

Organic Webbing.
JJJ.

That's about it. And the costume aswell, I'm fine with it.

CGHulk

01-13-2010, 05:11 AM

the actors and the director

If only! :( God Damn it Sony!!! :cmad:

spider-neil

01-13-2010, 05:28 AM

I don't think a single thing from the sam era will survive as they need the audience to make a clear distinction from the old and new otherwise it will be plain confusing.

craigdbfan

01-13-2010, 05:31 AM

Didn't see people getting confused that Routh was Reeves with Superman Returns.

People are really underestimating the GA if they think they can't differentiate that this is a different take due to a similarity in the costume.

If they'll get confused it'll be for different reasons. Like not watching the trailer and coming in thinking its direct continuation to the Raimi series.

spider-neil

01-13-2010, 05:34 AM

craigdbfan

01-13-2010, 05:35 AM

Knew I should have put the :p emoticon at the end of that. I was using sarcasm to show how silly a similarity in costume would create enough confusion that would damage the film.

DACMAN

01-13-2010, 05:36 AM

If they are going to do this, they need to do it all the way. Everything changes. Even the costume (though I love it). Make it pretty clear this is a reboot. Anything else will just seem half @ssed.

DACMAN

01-13-2010, 05:37 AM

*cough* 12 year gap *cough*

Right. Good point.

The only thing they HAVE to keep the same is making sure Spider-Man is awesome. But most of the changes will make sure he is even more so, awsome I mean. Everyone knows he will finally quip. FINALLY!

spider-neil

01-13-2010, 05:41 AM

Knew I should have put the :p emoticon at the end of that. I was using sarcasm to show how silly a similarity in costume would create enough confusion that would damage the film.

definately agree. wether they create small webs, under arm webs, removed the raised webbing, have a big red round spidey on the back, mirrored eyes, bigger eyes, they HAVE to create a CLEAR distinction that is isn't raimi's spider-man anymore

craigdbfan

01-13-2010, 05:43 AM

I was actually saying that the same costume wouldn't create confusion but more of the GA misinformation that this is a reboot.

I love the suit used in the Raimi series but if they do end up dramatically changing it, it needs to be aesthetically pleasing.

Something to "homemade" looking will just be a bit of a turn off. When it comes to costumes in super hero films I feel audiences are willing to suspend disbelief.

Kahran Ramsus

01-13-2010, 05:52 AM

1. JK Simmons - As others have mentioned.
2. The Costume - Or very minor changes. The colour scheme and same basic design should stay as it is Spidey's iconic look.
3. College - Except in animation, Parker has always worked better as a college student than a high school one.

Those are the main things.

FVD

01-13-2010, 06:15 AM

Definitely JK Simmons as Jonah. The rest of the Bugle cast sure though. Elizabeth Banks for good measure as she's taken a step up to leading lady material these days.

The costume agreed. There was nothing wrong with it in the films and for that I was happy about. Webshooters would make the films a little more realistic methinks.

SuperFerret

01-13-2010, 06:32 AM

SuperFerret, what is with you making me do so many moments where I smack my head on my desk to make sure you are serious lately?

Which moment? The one where I say that the new Bond isn't the suave, polished James that the character developed into over the years, or where the Spider-Man movies need to keep the same light-hearted tone in order to be done well?

Infinity9999x

01-13-2010, 11:36 AM

Are you serious? Casino Royale was one of the best Bond film's ever!

I don't think they should keep anything the same, new approach and new feel is the way to go. Otherwise everything will just seem like a re-hash!

It was sarcasm boyo:oldrazz:

DACMAN

01-13-2010, 12:16 PM

3. College - Except in animation, Parker has always worked better as a college student than a high school one.

That's the one thing they've confired is going to change. He's in high school, the way Stan wanted it. Besides, he's always worked the best that way. That's why they keep going back to it. Whether it's in animation, comics, or film.

ultimatefan

01-13-2010, 12:23 PM

I´d keep a lot of things. Raimi got far more right than a lot of nerds will give him credit for, they just put so much emphasis on what they think he did wrong that it seems like a lot more than it really is.

Excelsior.

01-13-2010, 12:27 PM

Casino Royale was a good movie, but far from a Bond movie.

:whatever: Just like the Dark Knight is a good movie but not a batman movie.

DAFOE!

01-13-2010, 12:35 PM

Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn, 'nuff said.

SuperFerret

01-13-2010, 01:49 PM

:whatever: Just like the Dark Knight is a good movie but not a batman movie.

Nope, TDK showed me the Batman that I know, which has evolved into a flat, one-dimensional brooder, so there's no comparison here. Daniel Craig's character in Casino Royale was not the suave, smooth gentleman rogue that James Bond has been for years. It never felt like a Bond film at all during the length of the movie.

TheSlag

01-13-2010, 01:52 PM

There is some things out of Raimi's SM1-3 that are good enough to keep (i.e. Spider-Man score, graphics, Aunt May, JJ, Harry Oosborn (Franco), etc.).. but I think with a reboot, it is best to make everything new.

Even recasting JJ.

Young Superman

01-13-2010, 02:10 PM

organic web shooters

TheSlag

01-13-2010, 02:14 PM

/\...points Young Supes to the War that is Mechs vs. Organics thread :cwink:

I would prefer Mechs for the reboot.

BillyZaned

01-13-2010, 02:15 PM

:whatever: Just like the Dark Knight is a good movie but not a batman movie.

:facepalm:

exactly why inbreading is outlawed

Oscorp

01-13-2010, 02:58 PM

Organic webbing and the costume

Reikowolf

01-13-2010, 03:01 PM

costume design

GoldGoblin

01-13-2010, 03:30 PM

-The spidey costume.
-JJJ

Everything else can go in the trash where it belongs...

VenomVsSpidey

01-13-2010, 03:45 PM

-The spidey costume.
-JJJ

Everything else can go in the trash where it belongs...

along with your old ideas?:awesome:

Mach2Infinity

01-13-2010, 04:14 PM

Webshooters would make the films a little more realistic methinks.

I think we're beyond realism when discussing a character who can scale walls, possess super-human strength and have an awareness bordering on precognition :cwink:.

It may be more believable/acceptable for certain people to adopt web-shooters but it makes me think of a studio's box ticking: "Let's make the character seem as superficially different as possible; artificial web-shooters [tick], slightly darker costume colours [tick], a bit of web under the armpits [tick]"...ad nauseam.

My line of thinking is to keep the elements that worked in the other films. Rather than change every detail to satisfy some questionnaire-esque mandate.

I would like J. K. Simmons to reprise his role. I would like minor alterations to the costume. I would like organic web-shooters. It's the characterisation and the villains about which we need to be concerned. These elements are vital if we are to enjoy the film. Not if Spider-Man's feet protrude one-inch more than they did in the other films.

Young Superman

01-13-2010, 04:16 PM

Organic webbing and the costume
Agreedhttp://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

Spider-Kurt!

01-13-2010, 06:17 PM

The costume and Jameson

Young Superman

01-13-2010, 07:21 PM

Jameson is another thing I would keep

ModestMr.Green

01-14-2010, 04:13 AM

Hang onto Jameson. Oh, and the little Spider-Sense sequences. Those were always neat.

spider-neil

01-14-2010, 04:23 AM

Hang onto Jameson. Oh, and the little Spider-Sense sequences. Those were always neat.

each to their own but I thought the way they showed the spider sense was terrible

mothy

01-14-2010, 04:39 AM

i'm going to miss elfman's spider-man theme.

spider-neil

01-14-2010, 04:39 AM

i'm going to miss elfman's spider-man theme.

I hated it, it was batman more or less

Golgo-13

01-14-2010, 04:49 AM

Keep the costume minus the raised webbing, give him the rounded red spider on his back like from the comics, and give him arm-pit webbing.

spider-neil

01-14-2010, 04:50 AM

Key the costume minus the raised webbing, give him the rounded red spider on his back like from the comics, and give him arm-pit webbing.

so you want to keep nothing the same :cwink:

Leenie

01-14-2010, 05:47 AM

It shouldn't keep any elements from the previous trilogy.

If Sony wants to do a reboot, then they better do a damn reboot, not an adaptation of Sam Raimi's trilogy. If Sony really wants to continue with Raimi out of the picture, then they should just do it.

Seriously, if this reboot is going to have a lot of elements that the Raimi trilogy had, then why not just keep Raimi in the first place?

mothy

01-14-2010, 06:11 AM

It shouldn't keep any elements from the previous trilogy.

If Sony wants to do a reboot, then they better do a damn reboot, not an adaptation of Sam Raimi's trilogy. If Sony really wants to continue with Raimi out of the picture, then they should just do it.

Seriously, if this reboot is going to have a lot of elements that the Raimi trilogy had, then why not just keep Raimi in the first place?
exactly, well put.

DACrowe

01-14-2010, 10:41 AM

I'd say the costume should be similar if not remain the same.

I also think the Raimi interpretation of Harry is far superior to the comic book counterpart, so if Harry is again a major character, I think that general presentation is better (though I would not recommend doing the Goblin Legacy in this trilogy, at least not Harry becoming GG again).

If they want to make it darker (and funnier, huh?) fine. But the amount of heart, humanity and tragedy that bubbles under Peter in RAimi's movies, especially in SM2, should remain. He can be funnier and more charismatic. But that sense of noble turmoil was captured to a degree not seen in many summer movies in Raimi's films. I sincerely believe it is why so many people loved the first two movies when they came out, despite the changes.

NinjaCarm

01-14-2010, 10:43 AM

Keep the same? Yeah, I want Spider-Man in it. Everything else like unmasking, campyness, Mary Jane centric ruin everything, wooden acting, rehased music in all 3 films, charmless Peter Parker, no joke Spider-Man, feel sorry for me villains constantly, dancing, Venom-lite, the list goes on and on.... ALL GONE.

Thanks.

BillyZaned

01-14-2010, 10:58 AM

there needs to be a dance number... keep them!!!

Mach2Infinity

01-14-2010, 11:16 AM

It shouldn't keep any elements from the previous trilogy.

If Sony wants to do a reboot, then they better do a damn reboot, not an adaptation of Sam Raimi's trilogy. If Sony really wants to continue with Raimi out of the picture, then they should just do it.

By all accounts the setting will be different since it will be set in a high school. There'll be new set of villains with distinct visualisation for each. You can be guaranteed they won't use the Green Goblin for the first film. I think it's likely they won't use any of the villains which appeared in the previous trilogy to appear in the next film. I think the visualisation of Spider-Man swinging on 'web-ropes' will be quite different (I remember the criticism of it in the first and third film). I hope the cinematography will be a little more darker (particularly if Spider-Man's first foray involves nocturnal vigilantism). I think if they keep the organic webbing and say J. K. Simmons on his role then I'd be happy. The latter would confuse people the most but I cannot imagine anyone else. The reboot will be defined by the characterisation and the villains. I would like to see the police chasing Spider-Man more because he is a vigilante and for Uncle Ben's killer never to be identified.

NinjaTurtleFan

01-14-2010, 11:51 AM

1. Jonah- Do not recast J.J.! J.K. Simmons is perfect for the role. His voice, his mannerisms, the look it's like Jonah leapt off the page. J.K. was made for the role; he was concieved onto this Earth to play him.

2. The suit. It's damn perfect. I could maybe see Spidey starting out with the webbing under his armpits like "Spectacular Spider-Man" but I would then want to see a progression.

3. I liked Rosemary Harris' Aunt May. She provided comfort, wisdom, love, sincerity, and also reacted the way Aunt May would given a situation she was put in. Maybe the Ultimate-version makes her hipper and less little old granny-like but keep all of what made Harris' Aunt May. Not saying you have to keep Rosemary Harris as her but just keep what worked about her.

4. Well, obviously the origin story. Told in either the opening credits or 10-15 minutes into the movie and then move onto Peter Parker/Spider-Man now at school, with his newly discovered gifts, still avoiding bullies and trying to win a hot date with the girls at his school, and being Harry's pal.

5. Music. The mix of Danny Elfman's orchestral theme and alternative rock/indy-sound on the soundtracks made each film work on it's own.

Changes:

1. Tell us what happened to Pete's family.

2. Show Norman as a smarmy, shadowy character. Keep his connections to the mob and people tightly-knit until he's finally exposed at movie's end. Disgraced and humiliated, that's when he decides to become GG and get his revenge not only on the board but on Tombstone or Kingpin.

3. Set up Adrian Toomes and Dr. Otto Octavius as lab partners working for Osborne. Have them first as cameos and then build their arcs through the movies. Maybe due to Oscorp having to shut down, Toomes finds out that his blueprints for a glider were stolen from him, and thus seeks revenge on Osborne, whereas Otto moves onto work in his own lab, but due to a radiation leak, the lab explodes, and infuses his harness onto his body.

4. Curt Connors and Peter's relationship. Let this grow and expand.

5. Daily Bugle. Give us more of Robbie Robertson, Betty Brant, Ed Needs, or other Bugle people.

6. Lastly, Gwen first, MJ second. I'd have MJ show up at either movie 1's end to complicate things or in movie 2 to get Pete to decide whom he really loves. Maybe Black Cat? Pete's got alot of women to juggle.

El Payaso

01-14-2010, 12:55 PM

Bernard the Butler. naturally.

spider-neil

01-14-2010, 01:13 PM

Bernard the Butler. naturally.

bernard - the plot dead end fixer*

:up:

* only use in emergencies

Abaddon

01-14-2010, 04:28 PM

The singing Asian woman

Chris Wallace

01-26-2010, 08:56 PM

I know many of you are pumped about the reboot, as you see it as this golden opportunity to correct Raimi's mistakes. And I don't want this thread to become a Raimi-bashing session, with post after post about unmasked fight scenes and overdone love triangles. But let's not discount the things he did right, either. The heart and soul of Spider-Man did come across in his films. He had a vision, others tampered with it and then they threw him under the bus.
In any event, I'm really hoping none of these elements make it into Webb's vision:
1. Outboard web-shooters.
2. A radically revamped (or overly simplified) costume for Spidey.
3. "Ultimized" villains. No "Magneto-Ock" or "Hulk-Goblin".
4. A dark, "Nolanized" vision of Spider-Man. Again, some may think this is the way to go, but Spider-Man IS NOT Batman.
5. Middle-of-the-road webshooters. If they're gonna go organic, go organic. If they do mechanical, do mechanical. None of this fake bracelet or "web regulators" nonsense.
6. SYMBIOTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Carnage, Venom, any of them. I'm sick of them. And I know I'll face some disagreement on this one, too. But think about it; Raimi gave us an alien creature crashing to Earth. The only way to bring Venom back now may be to go the "Ultimate" route. Is that what you want?
7. Convoluted love story.
8. Any aspect of Cameron's ideas.
9. Black Cat. I have my reasons.
10. A movie loaded with melodrama and short on action. Or action-heavy but with no heart.
11. Made-up villains.

©KAW

01-26-2010, 09:15 PM

Get rid of everything...I don't want to see a single thing left from Sam Raimi's movies. :cool:

ross2287

01-26-2010, 10:14 PM

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Chocolate Cake Girl.

It just isn't a Spider-Man film without her. :up:

Chris Wallace

01-27-2010, 05:37 PM

Another thing I don't want to see is Spider-Man killing. And to be clear, that means:
No deliberate taking of life. (Keaton-Batman killing Joker)
No killing in self-defense. (Can't think of an example here)
No unintentionally killing the bad guy in order to stop him. (Bale-Batman killing Two-Face)
No allowing an enemy to die if he's in a position to/able to save them. (MTV 2003 Spidey series; the fate of Lizard, Silver Sable, etc.)

THE LIZARD#1

01-27-2010, 05:52 PM

Keep J.K. Simmons and Dylan Baker...thats it.

Deaths Head II

01-27-2010, 08:42 PM

The only thing I would keep is Malkovich as the Vulture. It's a complete waste not to use him after he got on board for a Spidey film. :cmad:

Chris Wallace

01-28-2010, 05:27 PM

each to their own but I thought the way they showed the spider sense was terrible

What would you prefer? Wavy lines around his head like in the comics? Negative background like the 90's TAS? Glowing eyes like Hammond?

GoldGoblin

01-28-2010, 06:05 PM

Costume.

DACMAN

01-28-2010, 06:09 PM

I thought the spider-sense was actually pretty well done. They should keep the sound maybe but show it a different way. It's pretty hard to show a guy having a spider-sense on film.

DACMAN

01-28-2010, 06:12 PM

Keep J.K. Simmons and Dylan Baker...thats it.

Because it's a reboot I say get rid of everyone. Not to mention Stephen Lang could give us a great JJJ. Not one that's just there for comic relief. I want a JJJ that's 3 dimensional. I don't think Simmons could do that.

sauronthegreat

01-28-2010, 08:24 PM

Because it's a reboot I say get rid of everyone. Not to mention Stephen Lang could give us a great JJJ. Not one that's just there for comic relief. I want a JJJ that's 3 dimensional. I don't think Simmons could do that.

Oh I think he could, but not under Raimi's leadership.

I totally agree with a two, or even better, three dimensional JJJ, and not that comic relief one dimensional hysterical unrealistic character.

agustin09

01-29-2010, 05:25 AM

Aunt may, uncle ben, Killer of uncle Ben, Jonah jameson and that's all !!

sauronthegreat

01-29-2010, 05:54 AM

Aunt may, uncle ben, Killer of uncle Ben, Jonah jameson and that's all !!

The Sandman? :shock

rcazzy

01-29-2010, 08:02 AM

The Sandman? :shock

Oh snap!

Michael Papajohn was a good representation of the character, but I don't see why they can't find another person for that role. I loved Cliff Robertson as Uncle Ben. He brought a good friendly view to the character in his brief moments in the films but I don't mind them changing the character as long as he is still written in a similar way.

weezerspider

01-29-2010, 03:20 PM

Dafoe as GG
Simmons as JJ

I can seriously see JJ working, but I can seriously see not re-casting GG causing problems, but Dafoe is just too good. I'd find a way to make it work.

Chris Wallace

01-29-2010, 08:51 PM

I would keep the organic webbing, & the web pattern of the suit.

co2

01-30-2010, 03:55 PM

A. Peter should be somewhat of an outcast in the beginning

B. All of the main characters should be there..Uncle Ben, Aunt May, Harry, Gwen, MJ, Jameson. The personalities can be tweeked but must be the same at their core.

C. The costume can have very minor changes, but Raimi's movies pretty much nailed it. It should remain as faithful.

D. Here's one I never thought I would say before Raimi's Spidey, but the organic shooters were a great idea.

If all that ground is coverd...I'll be happy.

SuperFerret

01-30-2010, 04:00 PM

Oh I think he could, but not under Raimi's leadership.

I totally agree with a two, or even better, three dimensional JJJ, and not that comic relief one dimensional hysterical unrealistic character.

Do we really need J. Jonah Jameson to be a fully fleshed out character in the movies?

TheSlag

01-30-2010, 04:16 PM

Do we really need J. Jonah Jameson to be a fully fleshed out character in the movies?

Wouldn't he make a better character and opposition to Spider-Man if he was a fully fleshed out character, one who we understood his mistrust of Spider-Man?

I am not suggesting that they spend a lot of time developing that, but in flashbacks or some such, let us understand why JJ hates/mistrusts Spider-Man so much.

Without any weight to his character, his only purpose now is to act the clown/buffoon. Which some of the moments are greatness mind you (to me), I think his character has so much more potential if they choose to do it.

SuperFerret

01-30-2010, 04:20 PM

TheSlag

01-30-2010, 04:24 PM

He opposes Spider-Man because he distrusts him, he's a masked man with extreme power who goes around and takes the law into his own hands. There's really no need to put more into that because the audience can understand that easily. Let's face it, someone like that for real wouldn't be trusted.

JJ isn't an important character, and we shouldn't see him much outside of the Bugle's offices.

A masked man that fights crime, helps others would not be trusted? I think we need to understand JJ's motivation, especially the EXTENT that he makes it his business to not only not trust Spider-Man, but to try to bring him down.

And I think the character of JJ is VERY important in the Spider-Man mythos.

Mrpaul

01-30-2010, 09:45 PM

JJ should stay but a reboot generally changes everything

Chris Wallace

01-31-2010, 06:01 PM

A. Peter should be somewhat of an outcast in the beginning

Are you looking for a retelling of the origin? That's one thing I hope they don't do.

DACMAN

01-31-2010, 06:15 PM

DACMAN

01-31-2010, 06:18 PM

And I think the character of JJ is VERY important in the Spider-Man mythos.

Anyone who's read a Spider-Man comic would know this. People like him kind of make me hate Raimi's films. They can't think of JJ as anything more than a buffon who is there for nothing but cheap laughs. People like him probably thought Alfred couldn't and shouldn't be fleshed out in the Batman films. A character who has been in an ongoing comic book for almost 50 years can't have been fleshed out by now right? :whatever:

I challenge anyone to read Ultimate Spider-Man:Requiem and tell me JJJ isn't a 3 dimensional, well developed character worth exploring on film. Not just there to have for a cheap laugh.

Chris Wallace

02-02-2010, 07:48 AM

I read a mini-story, years ago, in which Jameson quietly mused to himself that he "created" Spider-Man; that if not for all his bashing & negativity, Spidey's vendetta on crime may have just run its course. But he may have felt the need to prove something; to overcome the image that JJJ had created for him.

SuperFerret

02-02-2010, 08:05 AM

So I take it you've never read a Spider-Man comic.

Oh, I get it. You want them to pack all 40+ years into the movies. That's a good idea, except for the obvious problem of it making the movies overly complicated, convoluted and confusing to everyone but the most hardcore of fans.

The movies are the Cliff's Notes version of the events in the comics, with minor adjustments. I'd rather that they focus on the important characters and events rather than give every supporting character the full fleshing out that they had in the comics.

david icke

02-02-2010, 09:12 AM

The movies are the Cliff's Notes version of the events in the comics, with minor adjustments. I'd rather that they focus on the important characters and events rather than give every supporting character the full fleshing out that they had in the comics.

They're not always 'Cliff notes' versions. Sometimes they expand and give us scenes that perhaps should have been in the books, but were not.
The big one in spider-man is showing how he got to teh stage of being able to swing on his webbing, not covered in the early spoider-man books at all, he just started doing this highly risky, extremely dangerous stunt.
In the movie they gave him a plausible reason for throwing caution to the wind after his first failed attempt, the desire to get his uncle's killer superceding any doubts or fears.

Same kind of thing with Batman Begins, we were given more insight into why he does not use a gun in his vigilante crusade, instead of 'I don't like guns because they were used on my family.'
We actually saw him go through a stage where he thought of using one, far more realistic and potent.

The movies don't always have to be cliff notes, but I know what you mean by that, and characters such as JJJ can be lfeashed out just with an extra scene or two, or even just some more dialoge and actions that is relevant than than just for laughs.

edit: and as for JK Simmon's capabilites...he is one of the best actors on the planet, no exagearation needed, the role of JJJ, even if fleshed out like the comics, is kind of beneath his capabilities, but he seems like a guy who likes to have fun with his characters, so I'm not surprised he took the role, he's not any kind of acting snob, so we should be grateful that big time talent take the time to give us our beloved characters in small cameos.