The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > General Movies > Misc. Comics Films

View Poll Results: In your opinion, which saga was better?
Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 40 26.14%
Christopher Nolan's Batman 113 73.86%
Voters: 153. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-31-2013, 08:18 PM   #126
Anno_Domini
Banned User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,997
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
So, have you read comics with Silver St Cloud, specifically her appearances in the Engleheart/Rogers issues?

Racer pretty much sums it up. And compared to Bruce's other love interests, Rachel IS forgettable. Catwoman and Talia are top of the totem pole. Vale has the history and has Kim Basinger's perfomance in the first major Batman film. And if we're adding in non Comics love interests like Andrea Beaumont and Wonder Woman from the JL/JLU cartoons, I can't really see how Rachel is actually better than most Batman love interests. She's definitely not top 5.
I don't read many comics, but I am aware of her. The love interest who deduced that Bruce and Batman are one in the same. Bruce even thought about quitting as Batman for Silver(which could be a nod with the character of Rachel, although it's hard to say that's fact, but who knows).

I'm just not a fan of most of Bruce's love interests. As you said, Catwoman and Talia are the top of that list, but for everyone else...I'll still take Rachel Dawes(although I still wish we had someone else that played Rachel in both BB and TDK).

Anno_Domini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 09:11 PM   #127
The Joker
Clown Prince of Crime
 
The Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Jollity Farm
Posts: 37,952
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
So, have you read comics with Silver St Cloud, specifically her appearances in the Engleheart/Rogers issues?
I have. Silver was great. In a mere 7 issues she really left an impression.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

- The Joker
The Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 09:31 PM   #128
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anno_Domini View Post
Goddamn dude, is this really an argument? The way she slaps? Lol.
Is your spider-sense telling you it wasn't actually serious?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anno_Domini View Post
Rachel is forgettable when it comes to the major comic love interests like Gwen, MJ, etc, but she's definitely not forgettable when it comes to Bruce's love interests.

But, Bruce ended up with the right on at the end of the trilogy
I'll give you one thing, she was so annoying it's difficult to forget.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 09:44 PM   #129
Shikamaru
Side-Kick
 
Shikamaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

I never really cared for Rachel but I would still take her over Kirsten Dunst's MJ.

Shikamaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 09:49 PM   #130
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shikamaru View Post
I never really cared for Rachel but I would still take her over Kirsten Dunst's MJ.
Ah, well, difficult choice indeed. You don't find good love interests in these superhero movies easily.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:05 PM   #131
psylockolussus
The X-Men 5 Advocator!
 
psylockolussus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: X-Mansion and the Baxter Building
Posts: 19,359
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

I prefer Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy. The Dark Knight trilogy was consistent in terms of quality but I never really had fun watching the trilogy compare to the Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy.

__________________
X-MEN RI5E' MUTANT OF THE MONTH | JEAN GREY | PORTRAYED BY FAMKE JANNSEN
"All kind of things." - X1
"This is the only way" - X2
"Kill me before I kill someone else" - X3
"Where else would I be?" - X4
www.twitter.com/xmen5movie2018
psylockolussus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:12 PM   #132
The Batman
The Dark Knight
 
The Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gotham City
Posts: 20,476
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
I have. Silver was great. In a mere 7 issues she really left an impression.
Exactly...which is why it was baffling to see someone call Rachel a superior love interest. I tell you what...had Silver been the one blown to bits in TDK, the audience might've actually felt bad.


I honestly don't think you could read that initial Engleheart/Rogers run and claim with a straight face that Rachel was a better love interest.

...And now I'm wishing Silver pops up in the Batman reboot.

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by hafizbat View Post
Welcome to the Batman v Superman forums, where people will take a perfectly reasonable comment you make and twist it into something completely different to make themselves feel better.
The Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:28 PM   #133
Shikamaru
Side-Kick
 
Shikamaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
Exactly...which is why it was baffling to see someone call Rachel a superior love interest. I tell you what...had Silver been the one blown to bits in TDK, the audience might've actually felt bad.


I honestly don't think you could read that initial Engleheart/Rogers run and claim with a straight face that Rachel was a better love interest.

...And now I'm wishing Silver pops up in the Batman reboot.
Hell yes! Very well said.

Anno, I respect your opinion but...really? Rachel is a better love interest than Silver St. Cloud and most of Bruce's other love interests?

Rachel was also a character that wouldn't have lasted long to begin with. Her whole purpose in Batman Begins that Bruce cannot be happy and be Batman at the same time. They mainly got rid of her in TDK because she was no longer useful to the story. You're trying to argue that a character created to prove a point only to become useless to the story after that point has been proven is somehow a better love interest than most of the ones Bruce had despite the rest having far more potential for sustaining a story.

Shikamaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2013, 10:45 PM   #134
Anno_Domini
Banned User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,997
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer Morose View Post
Is your spider-sense telling you it wasn't actually serious?
Ahh, so it was sarcasm. That's good

Quote:
I'll give you one thing, she was so annoying it's difficult to forget.
Katie's Rachel, most definitely. Her annoying pitchy screams in BB were very annoying indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shikamaru View Post
I never really cared for Rachel but I would still take her over Kirsten Dunst's MJ.
Anyone and everyone would.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batman View Post
Exactly...which is why it was baffling to see someone call Rachel a superior love interest. I tell you what...had Silver been the one blown to bits in TDK, the audience might've actually felt bad.


I honestly don't think you could read that initial Engleheart/Rogers run and claim with a straight face that Rachel was a better love interest.

...And now I'm wishing Silver pops up in the Batman reboot.
Then it's baffling, lol. I say what I say, sorry if you don't agree

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shikamaru View Post
Hell yes! Very well said.

Anno, I respect your opinion but...really? Rachel is a better love interest than Silver St. Cloud and most of Bruce's other love interests?

Rachel was also a character that wouldn't have lasted long to begin with. Her whole purpose in Batman Begins that Bruce cannot be happy and be Batman at the same time. They mainly got rid of her in TDK because she was no longer useful to the story. You're trying to argue that a character created to prove a point only to become useless to the story after that point has been proven is somehow a better love interest than most of the ones Bruce had despite the rest having far more potential for sustaining a story.
I'm not trying to prove a point at all. I'm not trying to force my opinion down someone's gullet, so how do I have a point to prove? I just rather prefer the character of Rachel Dawes and what she meant in the story, no matter how little anyone wants to view it as. Besides, as I mention, she could've been a nod to Silver anyways where Bruce wanted to quit as Batman because of Rachel in TDK.

Anno_Domini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 12:52 PM   #135
mclay18
Side-Kick
 
mclay18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,399
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSpectacular View Post
Batman Begins > Spider-Man
The Dark Knight > Spider-Man 2
The Dark Knight Rises < Spider-Man 3
Man, I have to disagree with you on TDK and SM2. They're both unequivocally the best in their trilogies, but I think SM-2 edges TDK out. SM-2 has this beautiful earnestness and crowd-pleasing sweep about it... it's compulsively rewatchable and it just leaves me completely satisfied.

I have to be in the right mood to rewatch TDK. It leaves you emotionally drained and the running time can take its toll. But it deserves the critical praise heaped on it, it just isn't something I can pop in on a whim and rewatch.

I've said this once about SM-3 though... the studio and Avi Arad played a big role in it turning out the way it did. Raimi deserves some blame since he co-wrote the script (like emo Peter and that nightclub scene), but it was mainly the producers' fault of forcing characters he had to use in the third film.

They should've given him creative leeway (as the first two films made $1.5B worldwide) or focused on finding the best story for a third film. It would've made for a better SM-3 overall. Would it suffer the same problems TDKR did, story-wise? That we'll never know.

It still saddens me that Raimi never got the kind of creative leeway Nolan got for his trilogy. But that's Hollywood for you.

__________________
Think McFly Think


"Come Think With Us."
mclay18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 12:57 PM   #136
MessiahDecoy123
Psychological Anarchy
 
MessiahDecoy123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 14,693
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

This poll is still too close for my liking.

Even the worst Nolan Batman movie is better than the best Raimi Spider-man movie.

__________________
MR - Morlock Rule
MessiahDecoy123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 07:51 PM   #137
mclay18
Side-Kick
 
mclay18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,399
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
This poll is still too close for my liking.

Even the worst Nolan Batman movie is better than the best Raimi Spider-man movie.
No way is BB better than Spider-Man 2. It's far better than the first or third Spidey movies though.

__________________
Think McFly Think


"Come Think With Us."
mclay18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 07:55 PM   #138
Anno_Domini
Banned User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,997
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Yah, I'd have to agree that Spider-Man 2 is better than BB, but certainly not better than TDK or TDKR, imo.

Anno_Domini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 07:56 PM   #139
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
No way is BB better than Spider-Man 2. It's far better than the first or third Spidey movies though.
Agreed. Batman Begins was a great promise, but SM2 was a great movie where Raimi was at his best within the saga.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 12:48 PM   #140
mclay18
Side-Kick
 
mclay18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,399
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Again, it's a shame Sony and Avi Arad screwed Raimi over with SM-3. There's a lot of scenes in SM-3 that hint at a much better movie (Sandman, action scenes, the climax), but then the overstuffed narrative and inane subplots derail it. SM-3 was a missed opportunity... but I didn't feel angry when it ended (unlike Origins: Wolverine).

Now that I think about it, both SM-3 and TDKR do suffer from a similar problem: length and villains' endgame. Big difference is that Nolan wasn't forced to include additional characters and didn't go off on unrelated tangents. He was able to focus on Bruce's story and give a satisfying ending.

__________________
Think McFly Think


"Come Think With Us."
mclay18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 01:13 PM   #141
Anno_Domini
Banned User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,997
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
Again, it's a shame Sony and Avi Arad screwed Raimi over with SM-3. There's a lot of scenes in SM-3 that hint at a much better movie (Sandman, action scenes, the climax), but then the overstuffed narrative and inane subplots derail it. SM-3 was a missed opportunity... but I didn't feel angry when it ended (unlike Origins: Wolverine).

Now that I think about it, both SM-3 and TDKR do suffer from a similar problem: length and villains' endgame. Big difference is that Nolan wasn't forced to include additional characters and didn't go off on unrelated tangents. He was able to focus on Bruce's story and give a satisfying ending.
As someone who didn't mind Bane and Talia's endgame(since it represented more than just Talia seeking revenge), I would just agree on the length. Even if I felt satisfied with TDKR, it could have used more time. I wonder which film needed the most though. When it comes to TDKR, I think there should've been more time just focused on Gotham City, while S-M 3 needed to give more time on all the characters except for Peter Parker and MJ(the less of her in that film, the better).

Anno_Domini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 02:31 PM   #142
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
Again, it's a shame Sony and Avi Arad screwed Raimi over with SM-3. There's a lot of scenes in SM-3 that hint at a much better movie (Sandman, action scenes, the climax), but then the overstuffed narrative and inane subplots derail it. SM-3 was a missed opportunity... but I didn't feel angry when it ended (unlike Origins: Wolverine).

Now that I think about it, both SM-3 and TDKR do suffer from a similar problem: length and villains' endgame. Big difference is that Nolan wasn't forced to include additional characters and didn't go off on unrelated tangents. He was able to focus on Bruce's story and give a satisfying ending.
Many times an artist has to work with directives and restrictions. Specially in this kind of movies. I very much doubt anyone forced Raimi into make ridiculous scenes as the fingergunning Peter, Peter emo-combing his hair or Peter at the dance club. That was pure Raimi sense of humor, which had ruined scenes in the previous movies but here destroyed much more.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 03:46 PM   #143
Shikamaru
Side-Kick
 
Shikamaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
Again, it's a shame Sony and Avi Arad screwed Raimi over with SM-3. There's a lot of scenes in SM-3 that hint at a much better movie (Sandman, action scenes, the climax), but then the overstuffed narrative and inane subplots derail it. SM-3 was a missed opportunity... but I didn't feel angry when it ended (unlike Origins: Wolverine).

Now that I think about it, both SM-3 and TDKR do suffer from a similar problem: length and villains' endgame. Big difference is that Nolan wasn't forced to include additional characters and didn't go off on unrelated tangents. He was able to focus on Bruce's story and give a satisfying ending.
Length is not a problem as long as the story and pacing is good.

You are also antagonizing Sony and Arad way too much. Raimi is by no means innocent in the disaster that was Spider-Man 3. He is in fact just as guilty as they were, maybe even a lot more.

The only thing Sony forced Raimi to use in SM3 was the symbiote. Not even Venom; just the symbiote. They wanted the symbiote introduced so that the franchise could do Venom down the road. However, Raimi did not want this and even admitted that he intentionally screwed up Venom and made him crappy so that he wouldn't have to deal with him again. That is also why he rushed Venom and included him in the last 15 minutes of the film. I understand that Raimi doesn't like Venom but that is not an excuse for him to show the disrespect to the character and to the fans that he did. His job as a director is to direct to the best of his abilities and him not liking a character doesn't give him the excuse to half-ass him. I'm not a big fan of the Vulture but if I was forced to use him in a movie, I would try my best to do him justice and to treat the character and the fans with the level of respect the he and they deserve respectively.

It also seems that people think the only bad thing about SM3 was Venom. This is not true. The movie is flawed from start to finish and all the characters in it are butchered. Even if you take out Venom, the film doesn't all of a sudden become a good representation of Spider-Man and his mythos, and the rest of the film's problems all came from Raimi himself, not Sony.

Shikamaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 08:33 PM   #144
mclay18
Side-Kick
 
mclay18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 8,399
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shikamaru View Post
Length is not a problem as long as the story and pacing is good.

You are also antagonizing Sony and Arad way too much. Raimi is by no means innocent in the disaster that was Spider-Man 3. He is in fact just as guilty as they were, maybe even a lot more.

The only thing Sony forced Raimi to use in SM3 was the symbiote. Not even Venom; just the symbiote. They wanted the symbiote introduced so that the franchise could do Venom down the road. However, Raimi did not want this and even admitted that he intentionally screwed up Venom and made him crappy so that he wouldn't have to deal with him again.
The late Laura Ziskin 'suggested' that they incorporate Gwen Stacy into SM-3 too. And I do blame Raimi for the stuff you mentioned (emo Peter, the horrid nightclub scene, et al), as he did direct it and he did co-write the film.

What I'm getting at here is that Raimi's past two Spidey films made a collective $1.5B worldwide and were critically praised. With that going for it, Sony and Arad should've given Raimi the freedom most directors get with a franchise like this -- as I said, Nolan got that right. Todd Phillips, as much as I hate to admit, got it. Even Justin Lin and David Yates did.

__________________
Think McFly Think


"Come Think With Us."
mclay18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 08:50 PM   #145
Anno_Domini
Banned User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,997
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shikamaru View Post
The only thing Sony forced Raimi to use in SM3 was the symbiote. Not even Venom; just the symbiote. They wanted the symbiote introduced so that the franchise could do Venom down the road. However, Raimi did not want this and even admitted that he intentionally screwed up Venom and made him crappy so that he wouldn't have to deal with him again. That is also why he rushed Venom and included him in the last 15 minutes of the film. I understand that Raimi doesn't like Venom but that is not an excuse for him to show the disrespect to the character and to the fans that he did. His job as a director is to direct to the best of his abilities and him not liking a character doesn't give him the excuse to half-ass him. I'm not a big fan of the Vulture but if I was forced to use him in a movie, I would try my best to do him justice and to treat the character and the fans with the level of respect the he and they deserve respectively.
I still don't get where you think they only pushed the symbiote and not Venom.

http://web.archive.org/web/200709031...x.php?id=41291

Quote:
As he has discussed previously, Raimi added that it was Arad's idea to add the villain Venom to the mix. "Avi Arad, my partner and the former president of Marvel at the time, said to me, 'Sam, ... you're not paying attention to the fans enough,'" Raimi said. "'You need to think about them. You've made two movies now with your favorite villains, and now you're about to make another one with your favorite villains. The fans love Venom. He is the fan favorite. All Spider-Man readers love Venom, and even though you came from '70s Spider-Man, this is what the kids are thinking about. Please incorporate Venom. Listen to the fans now.' And so that's really where I realized, 'OK, maybe I don't have the whole Spider-Man universe in my head. I need to learn a little bit more about Spider-Man and maybe incorporate this villain to make some of the real die-hard fans of Spider-Man finally happy.'" Spider-Man 3 opens May 4.
Arad sounds like a complete dick when Sam talks about why Venom is pushed into S-M 3.

Anno_Domini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 09:02 PM   #146
batfreakforever
A real fan
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 349
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

I just make it simple. If I want to watch spider-man fight doc ock I watch Spider-man 2 etc and if I want to watch Batman get his back snapped I watch The Dark Knight Rises. Ofcourse I will say The Dark Knight Trilogy because my blind love for the Bat but I do like the Raimi Trilogy. It give me good memories and I do like Spider-man. Not a question of who is better it's what you like.

batfreakforever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 09:30 PM   #147
redfirebird2008
Side-Kick
 
redfirebird2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,946
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
No way is BB better than Spider-Man 2.
Disagree. SM2 is a cheesefest and got a big pass compared to SM3 for similar flaws.

redfirebird2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 09:48 PM   #148
Snow Queen
Side-Kick
 
Snow Queen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,585
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by redfirebird2008 View Post
Disagree. SM2 is a cheesefest and got a big pass compared to SM3 for similar flaws.
I agree. I know it's a minority opinion but I can't sit through any of the Raimi trilogy myself.

Snow Queen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 10:41 PM   #149
Shikamaru
Side-Kick
 
Shikamaru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by mclay18 View Post
The late Laura Ziskin 'suggested' that they incorporate Gwen Stacy into SM-3 too. And I do blame Raimi for the stuff you mentioned (emo Peter, the horrid nightclub scene, et al), as he did direct it and he did co-write the film.

What I'm getting at here is that Raimi's past two Spidey films made a collective $1.5B worldwide and were critically praised. With that going for it, Sony and Arad should've given Raimi the freedom most directors get with a franchise like this -- as I said, Nolan got that right. Todd Phillips, as much as I hate to admit, got it. Even Justin Lin and David Yates did.
Raimi had a very similar female character in the script whose role was almost the same (minus her being Captain Stacy's daughter and a few other small things like that). Laura Ziskin only suggested for that character to have Gwen's name and looks. She did not force him to do that; it was just an advice. In the end, he included Gwen because he thought about it and concluded that it would be a good idea. That is not studio interference, or at least not the type of studio interference that you're thinking of.

Spider-Man 3 made around that same amount of money too. Plus, I would argue that Nolan was given too much freedom to do what he wanted and TDKR ended up being a major step down from the first 2 films. I'm not saying that directors can't be given freedom but them being given complete freedom is not always a good thing. My main point here is also that Spider-Man 3 wouldn't have exactly been good either even without the stuff Sony made Raimi do. Most of the problems the film has came from Raimi himself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anno_Domini View Post
I still don't get where you think they only pushed the symbiote and not Venom.

http://web.archive.org/web/200709031...x.php?id=41291
They stated they wanted the symbiote in Spider-Man 3. They did want Venom as well, but Raimi had the option to do him whenever he wanted. He just had to do Venom at some point in the franchise, and Raimi chose to quickly kill him off at the end of SM3 so that he wouldn't have to deal with any more symbiote stuff in the future.

Plus, that still doesn't excuse Raimi intentionally not putting even half of an effort into Venom just because he didn't like the character. Like I said, his job as a director is to direct to the best of his abilities. I'm not a big fan of the Vulture but if I was forced to use him in a movie, I would try my best to treat the character and the fans with the amount of respect that they deserve.

Quote:
Arad sounds like a complete dick when Sam talks about why Venom is pushed into S-M 3.
That is because Arad sounds like a complete dick in general regardless of whatever he says.

Shikamaru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 10:58 PM   #150
Tanin
Tsukino Usagi
 
Tanin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 4,976
Default Re: Sam Raimi's Spider-Man Trilogy vs Christopher Nolan's Batman Trilogy

Quote:
Originally Posted by MessiahDecoy123 View Post
lmao, is this thread for real?

You might as well compare Schumacher to Nolan.
Nolan does not have a large enough body of work for me to compare with really... but I'd give it to Shumacher pretty much any day until Nolan makes some more films.

__________________
The Shredder? Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw.
A good death is its own reward
Dead or alive, you're coming with me!
Tanin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:33 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.