View Single Post
Old 10-02-2012, 08:58 PM   #142
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 7,759
Default Re: "The Spectacular Spider-Man" Appreciation Thread (possible spoilers)

Didn't know this thread existed.

I kinda want to address the people that are upset over the show being cancelled. I get everyone is dissapointed it got cancelled. Me included. But if you think about it, the show's cancellation wasn't entirely in vain. In fact, I would argue the "spirit" of the show still lives in the Spider-Man movie reboot. Brace yourselves. Long rant is coming .

I'll say that I loved The Spectacular Spider-Man. I agree with everyone saying it's the best adaptation of the character we've had so far and that it is up there with shows like Batman TAS and JLU in terms of quality. If not, it would have definitely reached/surpassed that level if it kept going. I would go as far as to say that TSSM is the best Marvel show we've had to date (though I only recently started watching Avengers EMH which is in second place at the moment IMO; it may surpass it in my eyes after I finish the series but for now, it's in second place on my list) and in many ways, it is my ideal Spider-Man show based on what it was trying to be and based on the way it organized itself - taking Peter from his high school years as Spidey to his college years to adulthood, introducing the villains before they become supervillains, focusing only on Spidey's side of the Marvel universe and featuring as many characters from the comics as possible, being mostly based on Amazing with a few influences from Ultimate and other sources, multiple story arcs like the comics, adapting certain stories from the comics as the story moves, developing all the characters, and balancing out Peter's superhero life with his personal life are all things I wanted to see a Spider-Man show do before TSSM even came out and I remember even pitching a Spider-Man series that was similar to this.

As for the live-action movies, I was never really a big fan of the Raimi films. I thought the first film was ok but the dialogue made it cringeworthy to watch at times and the Green Goblin had no real motivation for anything he did after killing the people that fired Osborn (him). Spider-Man 2 was very well done though. And Spider-Man 3...yeah. I don't have to get into that. We established it sucks long ago. But even though the first 2 movies were not exactly bad movies, they weren't that good Spider-Man movies to begin with. They weren't exactly the worst thing to come out of Spider-Man but they lacked heavily as adaptations. Spidey was no wisecracker except for 1 or 2 lines in each film which didn't come out that great and funny to begin with nor was he shown to be a genius and use his brain in battles. Tobey's Peter was decent but also lacked a lot of what makes Peter Parker. Peter is supposed to be a nerd but not the silly George McFly type of nerd, which is what Tobey came off as a lot of the time. Even in the 60's comics, when nerds being the stereotypical nerds was a lot more common, Peter still wasn't exactly a complete stereotypical nerd. Raimi's portrayal of MJ? Sorry but not a good portrayal of MJ. Kirsten Dunst's portrayal of MJ? Not even a good portrayal of Raimi's bad portrayal of MJ. JK Simmons was great as JJJ (I'll admit that). The tone was also too cheesy and campy when they should have been more serious like the comics. Spidey comics aren't exactly Batman or Punisher dark but they're not campy either. I also felt the time period they take place in wasn't a good choice. They took place in the 21st century yet a lot of the characters looked and talked like they were from the 1960's. The franchise would have worked better as a period piece due to that. Overall, I don't think anyone can deny the franchise had far more potential as Spider-Man flicks.

Spider-Man 4 didn't look any better. Not only the acting and portrayal problems I listed above wouldn't have changed due to it being in the same continuity but based on what they were planning, it sounded like it would have been just as bad as Spider-Man 3. First of all, Vulture is a good villain but he can't carry a movie by himself, which is what Raimi wanted. And second, Felicia Hardy was going to be in it but instead of being the Black Cat, she would've been Toomes' daughter and would've became the Vultress as opposed to Black Cat. That sounds worse than what they did with Venom. Not to mention Raimi admitted he couldn't come up with any good idea and was too busy with other projects and knew he couldn't put his full effort into the film which is why he walked away, a decision I respect the man for. Dunst and Tobey said they wouldn't do another film without Raimi so recasting BOTH leading roles wouldn't have worked too well with the general audience IMO. Sony had 2 choices - either continue with the bad direction SM4 was going in or reboot the franchise and give the TV rights back to Marvel to get a short extension, which lead to the cancellation of TSSM. They went with the latter and the product we got was obviously The Amazing Spider-Man which is in my opinion, and also in the majority's opinion, a far better adaptation and Spidey characterization than the previous franchise due to reasons brought up and discussed over and over again that I won't get into (Garfield being a fantastic Peter/Spidey and far better than Tobey, a Spidey that is a wisecracker, webshooters and Spidey intelligence present, Gwen Stacy and a love interest played well and accurate, better tone and more modern take, etc.). Some people will argue that it's not exactly a masterpiece which I agree with. However, they set up the universe and characters fantastically and left tons of easter eggs and things to explore. The sequels have huge potential to be Spidey's The Dark Knight in terms of quality. Spidey finally got the movie franchise he always deserved.

I know some of you will say that TSSM didn't have to be cancelled since Sony could have kept the TV rights and give back the movie rights to Marvel and then we would have had both a good Spider-Man TV series and a good movie reboot but if you think about it, Spidey's movies are better off with Sony for 1 of these 2 reasons (or both):

1) Marvel is way too busy now with Avengers films and films leading up to Avengers films. If the rights went back, Spidey would be shelved for a while just like how Daredevil, the Punisher, and Blade all got shelved. No one knows when we could have gotten another Spider-Man film again.

2) Spidey's movies are safe at Sony from the wrath of Quesada, who would have had a say and some power over them if the rights went back. Don't kid yourself for a second that it's not a possibility. The man is clearly doing his best to ruin anything Spidey related. He ruined the Amazing comics with One More Day and is soon cancelling it. He made the Ultimate comics even worse by killing off Peter at his prime to replace him with a character he admitted was only created for racial pandering. I'm pretty sure he is part of the reason why Beenox isn't given more than one year time to work on a Spidey game (the TASM game being the first exception) which is why we keep getting half-a**** Spidey games. He ruined Spidey in animation with that Ultimate Spider-Man crap. The movies are the only thing left. I guarantee you that down the road, he would have stuck his nose in the Spidey movies too. Maybe not in the first movie but most likely in one of the sequels. Hell, TSSM is the perfect example of what happens when you give a Spidey property back into Quesada's hands. Sony was responsible for everything that made TSSM great. TV rights went back to Marvel and Quesada immediately ruined Spidey in that medium with Ultimate Spider-Man.

But on top of the reboot not being able to exist now if it weren't for Spectacular's "sacrifice", part of the reason why TASM was so good is also due to Spectacular. Someone from Sony said all the way back that Spectacular influenced TASM a bit since Spectacular was the first attempt at combining the best elements from Amazing with the best elements from Ultimate and was successful at doing that so they used Spectacular as a "guide" for that at first. Wish I could still find the site where I read that. I'm also pretty sure the idea of Gwen working for Connors was also taken from Spectacular.

Basically, my whole point is that Spectacular Spider-Man's success and cancellation not only lead to the TASM movie being made but also partly influenced it. I still would have liked the show to continue but because it paved the path for the reboot, I've come to grips with it for the most part and I think the "soul" or "spirit" (or whatever the hell you want to call it) of the show is still alive and continues in the reboot. As long as the reboot continues to be good, a bit of Spectacular is still alive IMO. So I'm good for the most part .

However, this does NOT excuse the abomination that is Ultimate Spider-Man. Marvel should have at least put their full effort into making a Spidey show that is actually well written and that is an actual Spidey show, meaning that Spidey actually ACTS like Spidey as opposed to a complete narcissistic irresponsible a**hole. Some people will defend the show by saying "Well, they wanted to do something different from the other Spidey shows!" Well, I can think of better ways you can do a better show than Ultimate Spider-Man while still making a unique type of Spidey show compared to the other ones. Heck, I can probably even take USM's formula and basic concept and make a better show than what we got. I also don't buy the whole "it's for kids!" BS. That line has been used so many times in the past decade that it became just an excuse and defense for horrible writing in general. Someone on a different thread quoted these words from an author whose name I forgot: "I don't write stories for kids. I write stories, and then someone else says "that's for kids"".

How I rate movies:
Shikamaru is offline