Childish Spidey 3 vs Corny FF2

[Chaos Bringer]

Sm3ftw

 

[KangConquers]

Stop callign Galctus a cloud He Was A STORM, A UNSTOPABLE FORCE OF NATURE

less Galactus more GAH LAK TUS

This is what Galactus should've looked like:

This is what he looked like:

 

[DACrowe]

...Grown...man...please.
This isn't the Sam Raimi of 20 years ago...or the one form a Simple Plan, this is big billionare Raimi, and if you think he's more moved from art than of money...well, enjoy the Waco stronghold sweet Kool-Aid.:heart:

Yeah A Simple Plan was a great movie 20 years ago. Nevermind that it was made in 1997.....Did you even see it?

20 years ago Raimi was making the Evil Dead movies. Not exactly high art either.

Yes, the Spider-Man movies are made by Sony to generate lots of money from a safe property. But while Raimi was stuck with studio politics (hence hte inclusion of the Stacys and Venom among other things) he still had his story he wanted to tell. That was the story of Peter's prideful fall and Harry's redemption.

FF2 had no theme or message. It was simply a commerical.

People say Silver Srufer's arc was more believable? WHAT ****ING ARC? He has about 5 lines the whole freaking movie. He just stands there and watches Sue Storm get skewered and then says, "I have learned we all have a choice." WTF?! Lee/Kirby's '60 comic books (which despite what some fanboys think were aimed at children) covering this story were more philosophical and deeper than that. It was shallow. It was faux-sentiment. It was just an excuse to keep the storyline rolling.

I may have hated the butler but compare that to Harry's arc in SM3. He honestly goes from best friend, to worst enemy to innocent to villain and ultimately redeemed hero. HIs arc was much richer and more fullfilling because Raimi took the time to explore that character and what makes him tick. He didn't just pay it lip service like Story and Frost did the Silver Surfer's "character development."


And lastly people think Johnny's arc was good? It was a plot thread introduced for no reason but to add padding to the story to make it 90 minutes. Where was the arc? He was lonely for being the selfish playboy for too long and at the end of the movie he blows up the buquoet before his girlfriend can catch it. That's it. There was nothing to that arc, whatsoever. Same with Sue and Reed almost leaving the FF. It is introduced and Johnny and they argue about it for all of five seconds and then it is dropped. It is only wrapped up after the cliamx as an afterthought in another 5 seconds.

No development, no depth. It is a dumb movie. I can understand not liking SM3, it is quite flawed and if you hate it, fine. But it has aspirations to touch the audience and make a point and say something. FF2 is on the same level as the Charlie's Angels movies. Dumb, silly and MINDLESS fun.


There were no arcs in FF2. Just moments to push the plot along. SM3 had an overcooked plot but at least it cared about its characters and storylines enough to attempt to explore them (but it had too many and fan favorite Venom got shafted which is all fanboys talk about). FF2 is fast food storytelling.

 

[coreymb16]

I picked FF2 over SM3 because in Spider-Man 3 they had way to much conversation that didn't need to be their while in Fantastic Four, it didn't spend much time talking and on to the action(which were really great). I only went to see Spider-Man 3 in theaters once and FF2 in theaters twice which is weird because for every superhero since X-Men I've only seen once in theaters

 

[dexterslab1976]

with the way marvel movies are, why would any look forward to iron man, thor, or any other movie from marvel. spider man 1 and 2, xmen 1 and 2, were about the only good ones. the others were average at best, but mostly corny. it got to the point where you could tell movies were being released just to make money, and the story line and acting got thrown in the trash. i haven't seen ff4 yet, but sm3, was a huge disappointment. if ff4 is any thing lilke the first one, it will be average. i am hoping for a good movie, but i am not getting my hopes up any more.

 

[chiefchirpa]

with the way marvel movies are, why would any look forward to iron man

Because the Director from the beginning said Iron Man is going to be an adult superhero movie (I could provide a quote from SHH on this).

Don't know about Thor. Or Cap. But mind you all these films are Made by Marvel. They're under more direct supervision of Marvel, unlike Spidey which is Sony or X-Men under Fox. So try to keep the optimism level up.

 

[SurfDUI]

To respond to someone else, why should Blade be put in another category? It was the first blockbuster marvel movie, need we forget..

Blade II was a vastly superior movie than most of the stuff Avi Arad greenlights. It's in my top 10 or 15 favorites of all time, not just comic live action movies.

You can't change the way Snipes plays the vampire hunter, he always plays it to constipated, but despite that, Blade II was stellar. It had horror, and more action than I was expecting. The only drawback was that It did follow some more conventional movie plot lines, like the picking off one by one of the vampire clan helping Blade, but even then, there deaths were pay-off.

In the same vein I'd pull Spiderman 2 off of the list, except it was an ideal live action comic movie and it's that strong tie that keeps it at the top of most people's list.

 

[Gilpesh]

I picked FF2 over SM3 because in Spider-Man 3 they had way to much conversation that didn't need to be their while in Fantastic Four, it didn't spend much time talking and on to the action(which were really great). I only went to see Spider-Man 3 in theaters once and FF2 in theaters twice which is weird because for every superhero since X-Men I've only seen once in theaters

At least Fox looks like it hit its audience... "Duurrrrrrr, SHUT UP AND FIGHT ALREADY!"

 

[Darth Elektra]

Both were disappointing.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Your telling me X-Men the 1st, HULK, and the Punisher are better than Blade I & II?

Yeah. They weren't bad movies, I'm just not really into the character of Blade.

 

[HR-PUFF&STUFF]

All of those movies will be made with kids in mind, because kids are the largest audience in the USA.

are you calling american kids fat?

 

[Noir]

FF2 it was a great movie.

 

[DACrowe]

Really? A great movie.

I wouldn't say that about most superhero movies. Like 95% of them. Very few, actually.

 

[DACrowe]

?

 

[Mr. Socko]

Wow, the race is close.

 

[phillip phonix]

i picked ff2 over spidey simply because unlike spidey i fell both doom and ss were done well unlike sandman (who was amazing) and venom who had what 6 mins of screen time in a 2.30+ movie. and yes you will say what about galactus the film was Rise of the Silver Surfer!

but in terms of story and character developmen it has to go to Spidey, but i was just dazled by all the location in ff!

 

[Gilpesh]

and yes you will say what about galactus the film was Rise of the Silver Surfer!

The Silver Surfer is basically tied so much to Galactus, Rise of the Silver Surfer = Arrival of Galactus.

 

[Mr Jide]

I thought both were good and was pleasently surprised by FF42.

 

[Cyrusbales]

SM3>>>>>>>FF2, but SM3 was still poor.

 

[Still A ThorFan]

Because the Director from the beginning said Iron Man is going to be an adult superhero movie (I could provide a quote from SHH on this).

Don't know about Thor. Or Cap. But mind you all these films are Made by Marvel. They're under more direct supervision of Marvel, unlike Spidey which is Sony or X-Men under Fox. So try to keep the optimism level up.

I agree. Gut feeling is both of the those might be PG-13 and I hope so. I feel Marvel has to understand that when you target these films to kids you're alienating us in the process. Yes, we fell in love with these characters when we were young, but most of us are in our 20's and 30's now. So we expect somewhat of a more mature film like the first 2 X-Men films and Hulk even though it wasn't that great. I liked DD very much except for the stupid playground fight and watching young Matt flip around the roofs with his cane.

 

[DawnWarrior]

Spidey3 had the better action scenes, but FF2 was better overall. Plus SM# was much worse than its predecessor, while FF2 was much better. I still felt phenomenally let down by the cosmic-cloud Galactus, but Spidey3 let me down in many more areas. (Still, Spider-Man 3 was better than X3).

 

[Sentinel X]

I know what you mean, it's just like even though people liked the first 2 x-men movies, when Superman Returns came out and it wasn't as good as they had hoped suddenly everyone is like "Bryan Singer sucks! worst director ever, never let him touch another movie ever again!!!!" I think that's ridiculous, but it doesn't change the fact that I think Spider-Man 3 was a terrible movie, but it doesn't change the fact either, that Sam Raimi is STILL a good director, he just did one movie that I didn't care for, so what?

I agree
Which director is better?...Sam Raimi, no question
Which film is better?...FF2.

Im sorry but SM3 was terrible. And I think it got a pass from critics only because the franchised is generally loved (ala how Batman and Robin was okayed by critics when it first came out...it wasnt until a while later that people realized it was utter crap). When I saw it at the movies, the first half was sooo good, I was thinking to myself "WTF are these people talking about, this is the best SM film so far"...then the second half came and I really really despised it.
Spider-man 1 is my favorite movie of all time, I love it to death, I loved SM2 (I liked the first more but part 2 is still really good) but SM3 was soo bad. Too much of everything, the whole black suit storyline was pointless to the plot for me and the charecters were underdeveloped.

FF1 was bad also but FF2 was a HUGE improvement from the first one. It was a really fun film. It was paced better, the charecters were much better, the story was much more interesting. And when I left the theater I wanted to see the sequel where as after leaving SM3 I wanted to just go to bed.
FF2 was the better film to me.

Spider-man 1>Spider-man 2> Fantastic Four 2> Spider-man 3> Fantastic Four

Overall though the Spider-man franchise is much better then Fantastic Four imo

 

[Green Goblin 1964]

sm3>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Spoiler

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Fantastic Four:Rots

 

[Deaths Head II]

Fantastic Four 2 surprised me for a Fantastic Four film.

Spider-Man 3 disappointed me for a Spider-Man film.

But in the end, Spider-Man 3 still wins for me. If I hadn't set my sights low because of the bad press of the first film and the news of Galactus being a Cloud, I would have disliked FF2. If I hadn't set my sights so high for SM3 because of the first two films, I probably would have liked it.

 

[Golgo-13]

The FX, with the exception of Silver Surfers, looked like a made for tv movie, especially those of Reed's. SM 3's effects looked o.k, some shots looked worse than those in SM2 which shouldn't be the case, as FX progressively gets better from year to year, so they have no excuse.

But whatever.

Both movies where overhyped to death, and bothed sucked. I did enjoy SM3 a tad more that FF2 though; now bring on a Silver Surfer movie Marvel!