Sequels David Lindsay-Abaire writing Spider-Man 4

[Spider-ManHero12]

I don't see the problem here...the best quips are short and memorable, so it wouldn't impact the overall tone of a Spidey film to have Spider-Man telling a joke or two. It's what he does. Would any of us have enjoyed Iron Man as much if Downey wasn't as cheeky as he was? It can work. It has worked. It's easy. My expectations have half to do with the canon. The other half has to do with having lots of fun. I should expect to have fun watching this next one, shouldn't I?

Yes, but Spidey might not be able to tell jokes all the time when fighting Villians in the film universe. Sure, it works perfectly in the comics, but as others have said, it might not work on film. We have had quips from Spidey in these films, not as much as the comics, but still a pretty good amount and tbh, I think it works.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Plus, it would kind of get annoying. I think the audiance would say, "Shut up and save her/him already!"

 

[The Joker]

Plus, it would kind of get annoying. I think the audiance would say, "Shut up and save her/him already!"

Does anyone say that when they watch the cartoon shows? No. If it was an annoying trait then they would have gotten rid of it.

This is not some corny costume from the comics that wouldn't translate well onto the screen. This is a classic Spider-Man personality trait. And it would work on screen. And anyone who's played the Spider-Man movie video games knows that Tobey Maguire can pull it off.

 

[Symbiote666]

I didn't know they were showing emotionally impacting, relatable, humanised cartoon shows in cinemas. Must have missed them. Nobody said that because it's was a childrens cartoon and nothing meaningful was at risk.

The cartoon show isn't a movie. Personality trait or not, you should NEVER have the hero of your movie stop saving someone's life to make a joke about the guy trying to kill them. "Superhuman strength, grenades, flying blades, glider, girlfriend and children in trouble, gotta get through this and save the- AHAHA, look at his shoes, gunna totally call him on that!"

No, don't think that would fit into the sitation.

Even the argument about distractions wouldn't hold up. "All right, gotta kill this damn spider-man and destroy the city, here he comes, wait, what did he say about my shoes? Damnit I try, but it's just so hard being a super villian you don't get a chance to- OH NO, I lost!"

Ock isn't stupid enough to fall for that crap. The villians should be focused, not Paris Hilton in mask. They're not going to compeltely fall apart the second Peter starts zinging them.

If they're going to go with the level of TAS jokes, they will need to cheapen everything to make them work. Jokes/quips and emotionally deep, well developed stories are opposing forces, use too much of one and you reduce the effectiveness of, or even ruin the other.

To me, getting rid of the majority of the jokes to aid a better story is a sacrifice I'm totally happy with.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Does anyone say that when they watch the cartoon shows? No. If it was an annoying trait then they would have gotten rid of it.

This is not some corny costume from the comics that wouldn't translate well onto the screen. This is a classic Spider-Man personality trait. And it would work on screen. And anyone who's played the Spider-Man movie video games knows that Tobey Maguire can pull it off.

Maguire could. He's good at it. But it's a video game. I don't want to be Spider-Man's dialogue full of quips. Think about it. It would get annoying. And tiring.

 

[The Joker]

I didn't know they were showing emotionally impacting, relatable, humanised cartoon shows in cinemas.

You must have missed the Pixar flicks then. And movies like the Lion King, and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm.

Nobody said that because it's was a childrens cartoon and nothing meaningful was at risk.

What do you mean nothing meaningful was at risk? He made jokes and wisecracks in all kinds of life or death situations, and it didn't take away from the moment at all.

The cartoon show isn't a movie.

So what? The fact that one story is told in animation, and another in a movie doesn't devalue the story or how it's portrayed.

Some of the most emotional moments in cinema history were told in animated movies.

Personality trait or not, you should NEVER have the hero of your movie stop saving someone's life to make a joke about the guy trying to kill them.

What are you talking about? When has Spidey ever STOPPED to tell a joke? He makes jokes and wise cracks while fighting.

Maguire could. He's good at it. But it's a video game.

So?

I don't want to be Spider-Man's dialogue full of quips. Think about it. It would get annoying. And tiring.

So you must hate the Spider-Man comics and cartoons then, because his dialogue is full of quips in them.

 

[Symbiote666]

You must have missed the Pixar flicks then. And movies like the Lion King, and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm.

I was talking about the SM cartoon show, which was for children. You can't understand it on any other level, it was for children. Look at Wikipedia and the list of things that were done to make it child-friendly.

What do you mean nothing meaningful was at risk? He made jokes and wisecracks in all kinds of life or death situations, and it didn't take away from the moment at all.

Again, look at wikipedia. Things may have been at risk, but the drama surrounding it was taken away for the kids.

So what? The fact that one story is told in animation, and another in a movie doesn't devalue the story or how it's portrayed.

It does when it's a childrens TV show which is targeted specifically at children. Everything was devalued for the cartoon.

 

[The Joker]

I was talking about the SM cartoon show, which was for children. You can't understand it on any other level, it was for children. Look at Wikipedia and the list of things that were done to make it child-friendly.

So what if it was for children? The Spider-Man movies are aimed at children, too. The Spider-Man comics are aimed at children as well. But adults still watch them because there's something for them to enjoy, too. Just like adults watch the Pixar animated movies. Look at all the kids they pack into the Spidey movies with speaking cameos and background roles.

The only time the Spider-Man movies went a bit too far for kids was in Doc Ock's hospital massacre scene. Other than that, they are totally child friendly.

So I don't buy for a single second that making Spidey quip more would not work. No way.

Again, look at wikipedia. Things may have been at risk, but the drama surrounding it was taken away for the kids.

And what exactly have the Spider-Man movies done in Spidey's relationship with his villains that is so different from the cartoons? Do the villains try and kill Spidey? Yes. Do they put innocents in danger? Yes. Do they kidnap Spidey's loved ones and put them in mortal danger? Yes. Do they thorw bombs at Spidey, pummel him with tentacles, toss him thru walls, hurl cars and trucks at him etc? Yes.

Apart from not actually seeing any murders, which again, apart from Ock's hospital massacre, were done in a total comical fashion in the movies. Look at Goblin's super instant skeleton bombs. LOL!

So I say again, why should the quips be left out from the movies?

 

[Jick]

I was talking about the SM cartoon show, which was for children. You can't understand it on any other level, it was for children. Look at Wikipedia and the list of things that were done to make it child-friendly.It does when it's a childrens TV show which is targeted specifically at children.

and ain't the movies?
Raimi has said many times that he makes it thinking about the children.
every scene he makes he worries about them. take a look at the blooper reels...

 

[Symbiote666]

Raimi's movies are made with the same childlike enthusiasm, at least SM1 and 2 were. But they are not directed a children, no matter how many times they say it. Sit an adult down in front of the animated cartoon and you will not get the same reaction you would if you sat him down with the movies.

I can't be bothered to type another variation of my point, so I'll say this. IF the villians aren't connected to Peter in any way, they can experiment with the jokes a little more, but if they are, like Dr Connors is (when they use The Lizard) then they're only going to hurt the movie.

Using The Lizard could prove to be an interesting tool for the character. Peter wouldn't know it's Dr Connors, to him it would just be a dumb, giant Lizard. Bring on the jokes, but the second he knows who he is they need to lay off.

Using more jokes is only going to make more people complain like they did with SM3.

 

[Jick]

Raimi's movies are made with the same childlike enthusiasm, at least SM1 and 2 were. But they are not directed a children, no matter how many times they say it.

yes they are, specially for children, and it can be seen. take the scene where he spin his webs for the first time, the elevator scene, the raindrops scene, the "itsy bitsy spider" singing...
Raimi says he does it for children, and you must've seen, already.
for children or not, Spidey needs to quip more.

 

[The Joker]

Raimi's movies are made with the same childlike enthusiasm, at least SM1 and 2 were. But they are not directed a children, no matter how many times they say it.

No offence, but I don't find that arguement very convincing. You just have to look at the movies to know they're made with children in mind.

Sit an adult down in front of the animated cartoon and you will not get the same reaction you would if you sat him down with the movies.

Of course not. A movie brings the characters to life using real people in real surroundings. It looks much more impressive than it does in a cartoon. But the story or tone is not dramatically different.

I can't be bothered to type another variation of my point, so I'll say this. IF the villians aren't connected to Peter in any way, they can experiment with the jokes a little more

Why is that? Peter never stopped the wisecracks when he learned Norman was the Goblin in the comics. Not to mention Peter didn't even learn Norman was the Goblin until the very end of SM-1. Ock was his old Science camp teacher in the 90's cartoon, and he still quipped at him. He's someone Peter admires and respects as a scientist, but he's not someone close to Peter.

You speak as though these villains are someone Peter is close to. Harry would be the only one who falls under that category. The rest of them, no way. Peter doesn't even like Eddie Brock. In the comics, they never even knew eachother beforehand.

Using more jokes is only going to make more people complain like they did with SM3.

Why is that? The complaints about the humour in SM-3 was because it was done in the wrong way. The stupid emo style hair, the dancing, strutting down the street etc. Lame, corny crap. That's not something even the cartoons or comics sunk to. They were more mature than that when dealing with Peter's dark side.

 

[Vash1538]

Even the argument about distractions wouldn't hold up. "All right, gotta kill this damn spider-man and destroy the city, here he comes, wait, what did he say about my shoes? Damnit I try, but it's just so hard being a super villian you don't get a chance to- OH NO, I lost!"

The argument holds up just fine, BECAUSE its PART of his character!!! Its not me making some fluff reason I'd like him to quip more, I'd like to hear some more sharp one liners BECAUSE that's what Spidey does! Its part of himself. Like with Bruce Wayne, Batman fans wanted to see Waynes detective skills, which were not really shown off in any film, until the Dark Knight. The earlier Batman films (B89, Returns) were still good films, but as most fans said, they lacked certain elements of Batman/Bruce Waynes personality, as found in the comics, which is where the movie was based on.

Perhaps when I was younger, I watched the SMTAS too much. I still enjoy that show greatly, and maybe that influences what I'd like to see out of Spidey in the films. Going back to the point of this thread, I think thats what Vanderbilt did, more of a Spiderman/Parker characterization from the comics, and since that flies in the face of most of what Rami and Parker had Peter/Spidey do in the films, he was ditched for their own writer, now that they are back on board.

But about Spider-Man taking off his mask, I agree about in SM2 with Peter in the car taking off his mask. But the mask in the films doesn't emote. It doesn't do anything except the jaw moving slightly. All it is is Maguire's voice used for action. Lines that are thrown in there that don't really effect the story. How many important line have you seen from Maguire with the mask on? "Let her go!", "Easy now!, "Don't do it, Goblin!" "Mary Jane!" etc.

You have a valid point, but as James Cameron talked about in his script, you could off set this with cleaver lighting, or possible alterations in masks, some very subtle, but enough to display emotion.

Talking about the mask not emoting, check out the scene in SM2 with Doc Oct's experiment. What the shots of Spiderman in that sequence, like when he saves Harry (almost looks pissed and frustrated at Osbornes attitude) and especially after he pulls the plug on the machine, and looks back at the empty space the experiment had been in....... that mask in that sequence emoted more to me, than anything Tobey could have done.

Again, this is all in my opinion!

 

[Doctor Jones]

You must have missed the Pixar flicks then. And movies like the Lion King, and Batman: Mask of the Phantasm.



What do you mean nothing meaningful was at risk? He made jokes and wisecracks in all kinds of life or death situations, and it didn't take away from the moment at all.



So what? The fact that one story is told in animation, and another in a movie doesn't devalue the story or how it's portrayed.

Some of the most emotional moments in cinema history were told in animated movies.



What are you talking about? When has Spidey ever STOPPED to tell a joke? He makes jokes and wise cracks while fighting.



So?



So you must hate the Spider-Man comics and cartoons then, because his dialogue is full of quips in them.

No, I love his quips. But most of the time it just wouldn't work. Please elaborate more on how videogames and the films could be similar dealing with it? Video games are told through levels, Spider-Man's beating up the bad guys, it's a game. Not that much emotion involved. It's usually about the game play. And something just needs to be there.

 

[Doctor Jones]

The argument holds up just fine, BECAUSE its PART of his character!!! Its not me making some fluff reason I'd like him to quip more, I'd like to hear some more sharp one liners BECAUSE that's what Spidey does! Its part of himself. Like with Bruce Wayne, Batman fans wanted to see Waynes detective skills, which were not really shown off in any film, until the Dark Knight. The earlier Batman films (B89, Returns) were still good films, but as most fans said, they lacked certain elements of Batman/Bruce Waynes personality, as found in the comics, which is where the movie was based on.

Perhaps when I was younger, I watched the SMTAS too much. I still enjoy that show greatly, and maybe that influences what I'd like to see out of Spidey in the films. Going back to the point of this thread, I think thats what Vanderbilt did, more of a Spiderman/Parker characterization from the comics, and since that flies in the face of most of what Rami and Parker had Peter/Spidey do in the films, he was ditched for their own writer, now that they are back on board.


You have a valid point, but as James Cameron talked about in his script, you could off set this with cleaver lighting, or possible alterations in masks, some very subtle, but enough to display emotion.

Talking about the mask not emoting, check out the scene in SM2 with Doc Oct's experiment. What the shots of Spiderman in that sequence, like when he saves Harry (almost looks pissed and frustrated at Osbornes attitude) and especially after he pulls the plug on the machine, and looks back at the empty space the experiment had been in....... that mask in that sequence emoted more to me, than anything Tobey could have done.

Again, this is all in my opinion!

Batman's detective skills are a huge part of character and has to do with the story that was involved in the comics and TDK. It's not like little side quotes or quips like Spider-Man where they're just little pieces of dialogue that means nothing after he sayd them. Because in the films, the close one is in danger.

And I actually do agree with you in SM2 about the lighting thing. That was a small moment though. Do you think that thing on in a scene like at the end of the film with Peter and Ock confronting eachother would pack that emotional punch verses him without the mask on? If there's a really powerful scene, he can't have the mask on. Not in a film. These are people close to his life and before they die, it would seem unfitting to confront them with just wearing that mostly emotionless mask. The two literally have to see eye to eye on things. Think about it. Would it have worked when Peter was confronting Norman, Ock, and Marko at the end of the films? How could he express himself and get, or at one case, try to get through to them?

 

[The Joker]

No, I love his quips. But most of the time it just wouldn't work.

That's a contradiction. You say you love the quips, but claim they wouldn't work. They work in the comics, cartoons, video games.....basically every other portrayl of the character.

Please explain in very fine detail why not in the movies? Do witty characters in movies annoy you? Did Tony Stark annoy you in Iron Man?

Please elaborate more on how videogames and the films could be similar dealing with it? Video games are told through levels, Spider-Man's beating up the bad guys, it's a game. Not that much emotion involved. It's usually about the game play. And something just needs to be there.

Because if Spider-Man making quips while in battle in a game, or a cartoon, or a comic book works, there's no reason it would not work in a movie. It's the same characters, the same scenarios, it's just being done in a movie.

It's not like some corny costume that can't be done on screen. It's a character trait. And a hallmark Spider-Man trait at that.

And you have offered no sound reasons as to why they can't do it. "It wouldn't work because it's a movie" just doesn't cut it.

 

[Doctor Jones]

That's a contradiction. You say you love the quips, but claim they wouldn't work. They work in the comics, cartoons, video games.....basically every other portrayl of the character.

Please explain in very fine detail why not in the movies? Do witty characters in movies annoy you? Did Tony Stark annoy you in Iron Man?



Because if Spider-Man making quips while in battle in a game, or a cartoon, or a comic book works, there's no reason it would not work in a movie. It's the same characters, the same scenarios, it's just being done in a movie.

It's not like some corny costume that can't be done on screen. It's a character trait. And a hallmark Spider-Man trait at that.

And you have offered no sound reasons as to why they can't do it. "It wouldn't work because it's a movie" just doesn't cut it.

I have offered reasons. You just can't see them because you think they can fit every single trait and it can work for a film. Just because it works for a comic, doesn't mean it can work for a film. And Because wit is an essential part of Tony Stark. And Downey Jr. has the same personality pretty much. C'mon. How is it a hallmark trait? There's more important things other than quips. Raimi gets the spirit of the character. Spider-Man is about how he is all of us. We can identify with him. The Spider-Man I grew up with taught me that taking responsibilty for your actions even though you might have powers isn't fun at all. He's us. Of all ages. It's not about his quips. That is one thing they could of done without in the films. I would like to see it sure, but in a film, it's a film. In real life, why would you want to wisecrack someone who's close to yu when your in the middle of fighting them or when someone's in danger?

Tell me, where in the films would they could use wisecracks? Where it doesn't involve danger of Peter's loved one's or the entire city is in danger. Which happens in every big action scene.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Spider-Man doesn't think "I'm gonna call this guy out on his shoes", he instictively makes quips as a way to deal with the situation. He's a weird ass bastard.

 

[The Joker]

I have offered reasons.

Where? All you've said is that it's a movie, so they can't work.

You just can't see them because you think they can fit every single trait and it can work for a film.

What are you talking about? Where did I say that? Show me the quote.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said any such thing. I can't see your reasoning because your reasoning of "It's a movie so it can't work" makes no sense.

Just because it works for a comic, doesn't mean it can work for a film.

True for some things. But in this case, there's no reason for it not to work.

And Because wit is an essential part of Tony Stark.

Same for Spider-Man. He is infamous for his quips.

And Downey Jr. has the same personality pretty much

So what? An actor is paid to be someone else. Alfred Molina is not a ruthless, nasty mad scientist in real life. But he acted like he was in SM-2. Heath Ledger is not a psycho clown in real life. But he was damn convincing as one in TDK. That's what an actor does, they pretend to be someone else.

Are you saying Tobey Maguire is not a good enough actor?

C'mon. How is it a hallmark trait?

WHAT? No offence, but are you sure you're a Spider-Man fan? Can you show me any form of Spidey, aside from the movies, which doesn't portray him as a witty superhero?

Apart from Deadpool, he's got the biggest mouth in the Marvel Universe.

There's more important things other than quips. Raimi gets the spirit of the character.

Does he? Is Spider-Man's story "All about a girl"? Raimi got some elements right, no question. But at the end of the day, that is his version of the character.

Spider-Man is about how he is all of us. We can identify with him. The Spider-Man I grew up with taught me that taking responsibilty for your actions even though you might have powers isn't fun at all. He's us. Of all ages. It's not about his quips.

Who said it was about the quips? Where are you getting this from?

We are arguing that the quips are a hallmark trait of the Spidey persona, and the can work in the movie. You are now trying to turn the argument in a different direction by trying to list the things Raimi did include, and not those he didn't.

That is one thing they could of done without in the films.

Really? So, the Spider-Man you know has very little to say in costume?

I would like to see it sure, but in a film, it's a film. In real life, why would you want to wisecrack someone who's close to you when your in the middle of fighting them or when someone's in danger?

A teenager who uses humour to hide his anxiety in battle, and at the same time throw his enemies off balance by mocking them.

That's the Spider-Man I know.

Tell me, where in the films would they could use wisecracks? Where it doesn't involve danger of Peter's loved one's or the entire city is in danger. Which happens in every big action scene.

Anywhere you like. Fighting Goblin at the Unity festival. Ock in the bank. Ock on the train, or clock tower. Goblin in the burning building. Goblin in the old building.

Anywhere you like.

 

[Hectorminator]

IF the villians aren't connected to Peter in any way, they can experiment with the jokes a little more, but if they are, like Dr Connors is (when they use The Lizard) then they're only going to hurt the movie.

Using The Lizard could prove to be an interesting tool for the character. Peter wouldn't know it's Dr Connors, to him it would just be a dumb, giant Lizard. Bring on the jokes, but the second he knows who he is they need to lay off.

Using more jokes is only going to make more people complain like they did with SM3.

I kind of agree with this. Like if he's fighting Kraven the Hunter, one of the many things that pisses Kraven off about Spider-Man is that he's constantly cracking jokes and making fun of him. It gets under his skin.

But if Peter's fighting the Lizard, who he should know is Curt Conners, he doesn't really joke that much, the situation's too close to home.

 

[Spider-Fan]

The quips have had effective use in the movies, though granted not frequently used. I think at this point more can be added, but I can see why from a dramatic standpoint Raimi opted to not use them in many of the action sequences. I would like to see more jokes done, but if we do in fact get the Lizard as the villain, don't count on them.

I don't think the quips as used thus far are a crime against the Spider-Man comics though, since I can creatively see why Raimi did it.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Where? All you've said is that it's a movie, so they can't work.



What are you talking about? Where did I say that? Show me the quote.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never said any such thing. I can't see your reasoning because your reasoning of "It's a movie so it can't work" makes no sense.



True for some things. But in this case, there's no reason for it not to work.



Same for Spider-Man. He is infamous for his quips.



So what? An actor is paid to be someone else. Alfred Molina is not a ruthless, nasty mad scientist in real life. But he acted like he was in SM-2. Heath Ledger is not a psycho clown in real life. But he was damn convincing as one in TDK. That's what an actor does, they pretend to be someone else.

Are you saying Tobey Maguire is not a good enough actor?



WHAT? No offence, but are you sure you're a Spider-Man fan? Can you show me any form of Spidey, aside from the movies, which doesn't portray him as a witty superhero?

Apart from Deadpool, he's got the biggest mouth in the Marvel Universe.



Does he? Is Spider-Man's story "All about a girl"? Raimi got some elements right, no question. But at the end of the day, that is his version of the character.



Who said it was about the quips? Where are you getting this from?

We are arguing that the quips are a hallmark trait of the Spidey persona, and the can work in the movie. You are now trying to turn the argument in a different direction by trying to list the things Raimi did include, and not those he didn't.



Really? So, the Spider-Man you know has very little to say in costume?



A teenager who uses humour to hide his anxiety in battle, and at the same time throw his enemies off balance by mocking them.

That's the Spider-Man I know.



Anywhere you like. Fighting Goblin at the Unity festival. Ock in the bank. Ock on the train, or clock tower. Goblin in the burning building. Goblin in the old building.

Anywhere you like.

Damn it to hell! The Hype knocked me off for typing too long. Crap, and I don't want to type it again.

Let me just ask you this, put yourself in these situations of danger, how would you react? Would you try to subdue the villain, get the job done, and save whoever it is, or try to pass humor along with these? This is all done under pressure and the pace of it all. Everything's too quick to react with humor. They are life and death situations, and humor is the last thing I would treat these situations with.

But I guess we can say is to each his own.

And nice avvy.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

But if Peter's fighting the Lizard, who he should know is Curt Conners, he doesn't really joke that much, the situation's too close to home.

Agreed, Peter would most likely be saying something like "Connors, I want help you!" instead of joking around, you know what I mean?

 

[The Joker]

Let me just ask you this, put yourself in these situations of danger, how would you react? Would you try to subdue the villain, get the job done, and save whoever it is, or try to pass humor along with these?

Peter does try to subdue the villain and try to get the job done. Difference is that he covers up his nervousness and anxiety while doing it with humour.

Alot of people do that. They try to hide fear or anxiety with humour.

This is all done under pressure and the pace of it all. Everything's too quick to react with humor. They are life and death situations, and humor is the last thing I would treat these situations with.

But that's you. How you or I might react to a situation is not a universal reaction for everyone.

But I guess we can say is to each his own.

Exactly.

And nice avvy.

Thank you. Don't need to tell you how good yours looks

 

[Visionary]

Damn it to hell! The Hype knocked me off for typing too long. Crap, and I don't want to type it again.

Let me just ask you this, put yourself in these situations of danger, how would you react? Would you try to subdue the villain, get the job done, and save whoever it is, or try to pass humor along with these? This is all done under pressure and the pace of it all. Everything's too quick to react with humor. They are life and death situations, and humor is the last thing I would treat these situations with.

But I guess we can say is to each his own.

And nice avvy.

I agree with this, once, I tried to explain this to fanboys, but they think everything copied exactly from the comics should be put on screen--I don't.

However, it is possible to translate Spidey's humor/banter on screen, but it has to be done only when Spider-Man is in danger, not other people. You can also show Spidey's personality/banter when there is no danger. There's banter from other heroes/key characters in Star Wars, Die-Hard, True Lies, Mr. & Mrs. Smith, Terminator 2, Aliens, etc. But you can't over do it, and you have to back it up with other scenes that are blood serious, dramatic and/or coupled with great action sequences. You can't just treat Spider-Man like a freakin' comedy.