Sequels Black Cat Ideas?

[Spiderman6592]

Can't tell if you're serious about the bit about Peter losing his powers and Webb copying Raimi or not...


if you are

 

[spideyguy16]

I dont wanna see the whole " i cant deal with this superhero stuff anymore, i quit" butthats happened already in both the spidey sequels and batman sequels. I mean, it makes sense and most characters fell like giving up once in a while but.... Weve seen this already. Theyll probably save that giving up syuff when gwen dies

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I mean, it makes sense and most characters fell like giving up once in a while but.... Weve seen this already.

Except, Spidey whent the furthest with it. It truly was monumental, which is one of the reasons it was adapted (greatly) in S-M2.

However, I don't see that happening in a sequel.

 

[spideyguy16]

Im just saying we dont need to see it again, one because its been done already, yes greatly, (with the suit in the trash can) and two, its very common in superhero movies.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Well, it's not like the "Spider-Man no more" thing was an unoriginal or uninspired idea. It made sense, and that part of Spider-Man 2 came straight from the comics. Hell, the scene with the suit in the trashcan and Peter walking away was ripped straight from the pages of the comic. That scene was one of the most iconic ones in that movie.

I wouldn't mind seeing something similar in a sequel. Peter can't cope with having to lie to his Aunt, nor can he have a stable relationship with ____, and he considers giving up being Spider-Man.

I know that sounds similar to Spider-Man 2, but there really are a lot of different ways to go about the giving up the mantle arc.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Your quick to assume. One movie out of the three automatically sets the path for the others? SM3 would like a word with you. Also, Webb didn't write the script, so it's not his call what stories to take, and the origin story is being used to help associate this series as it's own.

The origin story doesn't need to be retold, both cartoons didn't start with the origin, retelling the origin is just lazy writing to me. Especially since the origin was already told very well 10 years ago.

Well, it's not like the "Spider-Man no more" thing was an unoriginal or uninspired idea. It made sense, and that part of Spider-Man 2 came straight from the comics. Hell, the scene with the suit in the trashcan and Peter walking away was ripped straight from the pages of the comic. That scene was one of the most iconic ones in that movie.

I wouldn't mind seeing something similar in a sequel. Peter can't cope with having to lie to his Aunt, nor can he have a stable relationship with ____, and he considers giving up being Spider-Man.

I know that sounds similar to Spider-Man 2, but there really are a lot of different ways to go about the giving up the mantle arc.

Maybe they should go the other way then, Peter thinks his life as Peter is too hard and starts being Spidey more and more. It's a great way for the Black Cat to get involved, since she's another costumed crimefighter. They keep saying this is supposed to be inspired by the ultimate comics (which I don't see at all) use the Kitty-Pete relationship storyline, just substitute Felicia/Black Cat for Kitty, since she can't be used.

 

[Troy_Parker]

I think it's just one or two characterizations and the overall look is supposed to be from the Ultimate universe. A lot of the stuff is pretty much the 616 universe reskinned, mixed with their own stuff. Which seems to be working well for this movie.

And I wouldn't mind that either, the opposite route seems very interesting too.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Any one who says they didn't need to do an origin is completely off their mind. And don't even use TIH as an example.

Hulk (2003) was a complete and utter failure in every sense of the word. I doubt anyone really had the first Hulk film in mind when going to see TIH. The original film set such an incredibly low benchmark for the successor to surpass.

This is not the case with Spider-Man. SM1 and 2 are critically acclaimed and all 3 were extremely successful at the box office.

In order for this film to set itself apart and to make it clear that it is its own story, and own franchise, the origin was absolutely necessary. If the origin was simply told in the credits, or through flashbacks, many people would undoubtedly be thinking that this was simply a continuation, but with a new cast since they got too old.

Also, SM1 covered the origin, but never really went in depth with it in terms of Peter's trials and errors, the creation of his suit, or the creation of his webshooters (which were obviously missing completely).

Like it or not, the origin was absolutely necessary.

 

[SpaceWay2009]

Maybe they should go the other way then, Peter thinks his life as Peter is too hard and starts being Spidey more and more. It's a great way for the Black Cat to get involved, since she's another costumed crimefighter. They keep saying this is supposed to be inspired by the ultimate comics (which I don't see at all) use the Kitty-Pete relationship storyline, just substitute Felicia/Black Cat for Kitty, since she can't be used.

That would be an interesting story line. It would certainly be different and new. Normally, we would see superheroes giving up their superhero life, but this would be the opposite. Peter Parker spending more of his time as Spider-Man, neglecting his normal life.

 

[spideyguy16]

Thats a new way to looks at it, and i approve. But i dont think they should substiture felicia for kitty, first of all, kitty is an xmen character and it just wont happen. And 2, why not just use liz allen or something. Shes not as popular, but the movies can make her popular

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Any one who says they didn't need to do an origin is completely off their mind. And don't even use TIH as an example.

Hulk (2003) was a complete and utter failure in every sense of the word. I doubt anyone really had the first Hulk film in mind when going to see TIH. The original film set such an incredibly low benchmark for the successor to surpass.

This is not the case with Spider-Man. SM1 and 2 are critically acclaimed and all 3 were extremely successful at the box office.

In order for this film to set itself apart and to make it clear that it is its own story, and own franchise, the origin was absolutely necessary. If the origin was simply told in the credits, or through flashbacks, many people would undoubtedly be thinking that this was simply a continuation, but with a new cast since they got too old.

Also, SM1 covered the origin, but never really went in depth with it in terms of Peter's trials and errors, the creation of his suit, or the creation of his webshooters (which were obviously missing completely).

Like it or not, the origin was absolutely necessary.

Well considering everyone I know who isn't a comic geek thinks this is just a remake of Spider-man 1 it's not a good strategy. You should do something new, Blade, X-Men, '89 Batman all showed their characters already in superhero mode. When you retell the same story all you're going to get is people comparing the two. This movie seems very similar, the movie is going to be Pete's origin while a mentor is taking an experimental formula that changes him into a supervillian that he must stop.

Thats a new way to looks at it, and i approve. But i dont think they should substiture felicia for kitty, first of all, kitty is an xmen character and it just wont happen. And 2, why not just use liz allen or something. Shes not as popular, but the movies can make her popular

Why would you use Liz Allen in my take? The whole thing is to give Pete a romantic interest that is also a costumed crimefighter. Liz doesn't fit that bill, unless they make her Firestar or whatever her code name was/is in the ultimate universe.

 

[Troy_Parker]

I actually hate it when I see random comments on YouTube, etc like "Why are they doing Spider-Man 1 again?" it's like... ARGHHHH. -______-

 

[American_Hobo]

but it's true though.
At least from the trailer, it pretty much looks like remake of first movie.
Only time will tell if we're right or wrong about this.

 

[Mary Jane Watson]

I actually hate it when I see random comments on YouTube, etc like "Why are they doing Spider-Man 1 again?" it's like... ARGHHHH. -______-

I JUST went to Youtube and read many comments...aw man...

I want to shoot this guy who said this:

"THIS KID IS A *** HE DOESNT DESERVE TO BE SPIDERMAN....THIS IS GOING TO SUCK DONT WATCH IT....HERE COMES A FLOP !!!!!"

Anywayyysss...

I would LOVE to see the Black Cat in the sliver screen..but many people probably will say "Black cat IS a ripoff of Catwoman from TDKR!" ( like Mirror egde lol ) So I dont know about that.

 

[Troy_Parker]

but it's true though.
At least from the trailer, it pretty much looks like remake of first movie.
Only time will tell if we're right or wrong about this.

Not sure why you think that but, it honestly doesn't. The first major thing is that you see Peter's parents in the trailer, which we didn't see at all in Raimi's Spider-Man.

 

[El Payaso]

To call Black Cat a Catwoman replica is extremely ignorant.

I agree. It's not a replica. It's barefaced plagiarism.

 

[American_Hobo]

Not sure why you think that but, it honestly doesn't. The first major thing is that you see Peter's parents in the trailer, which we didn't see at all in Raimi's Spider-Man.

Yeah I mean of course it will not be exactly same as the 2002 movie, but they really should've skipped the origin story because well....we've already seen one and there's no need to see it again really, especially only after 10 years.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Yeah I mean of course it will not be exactly same as the 2002 movie, but they really should've skipped the origin story because well....we've already seen one and there's no need to see it again really, especially only after 10 years.

It's a reboot. An origin IS needed. Regardless of how (not so) recent the first movie in the previous Spider-Man trilogy was.

 

[©KAW]

I agree. It's not a replica. It's barefaced plagiarism.

Indeed, there's no getting around it. It would be Catwoman in a Spider-Man movie.

 

[American_Hobo]

Batman 1989 had no origin shown.
And it worked pretty well.
the general audience will think the movie looks too close to the first movie and may not be interested to see it.
Like I said, only time will tell if the origin storyline was necessary or not.

 

[Troy_Parker]

Batman 1989 wasn't a reboot of anything though. :P

I'd say it is pretty necessary, but we'll see.

EDIT: And Batman 1989 did have kind of an origin scene. It just wasn't explored or anything.

 

[American_Hobo]

I agree. It's not a replica. It's barefaced plagiarism.

I think Blackcat could work well in the sequel.
As long as they make her look like a cat, lol.
If they ever use her, I hope she actually resembles a cat, not like the one Anne Hathaway will wear.

 

[Spiderman6592]

Well considering everyone I know who isn't a comic geek thinks this is just a remake of Spider-man 1 it's not a good strategy. You should do something new, Blade, X-Men, '89 Batman all showed their characters already in superhero mode. When you retell the same story all you're going to get is people comparing the two. This movie seems very similar, the movie is going to be Pete's origin while a mentor is taking an experimental formula that changes him into a supervillian that he must stop.

So...Spider-Man 2 was a remake of Spider-Man 1...sans the origin?


90% of superhero movies, and especially Spider-Man, have villains that somehow connect on a personal level to the hero.

And the Lizard was the only real villain they could have used to give this film some oomph. They sure as well were not going to start with Goblin or Ock, and anyone else would have just been a lackluster villain to open the franchise with.

And it's very easily to discern that this film is very different from the original. Comic Con attendees said it was made even MORE clear during the panel. The reactions were overwhelmingly positive, and even naysayers that were saying the same as you ("too soon for an origin" blah blah blah) were eating their words.

When the film is released, hell when the second trailer is released, I think people are going to forget all these complaints anyway.

 

[American_Hobo]

Batman 1989 wasn't a reboot of anything though. :P

I'd say it is pretty necessary, but we'll see.

EDIT: And Batman 1989 did have kind of an origin scene. It just wasn't explored or anything.

Yeah I mean I'm speaking from general audience's POV.
I don't really care if they do the origin storyline again or not.
Just that general audience may feel like it's too repetitive or similar to 2002 movie.

 

[©KAW]

They were pretty much eating some crow, let's hope a lot more will when the film presents itself.