Flagship Character Reboot Battle(TASM vs MoS)

[Kahran Ramsus]

It could be argued that Sony has more faith in Spidey than WB has in Supes. Granted, Sony doesn't have any other characters other than Ghost Rider to be used but they are pushing forward with several TASM sequels. That spells confidence. WB on the other hand seems to think they need Batman to come in and pinch hit to ensure MoS2 is a success. It tells us they have less confidence. But both companies(and FOX) are being reactionary to what MS/Disney is doing. As are other non-superhero movies. It's pretty clear that expanded continuity universes are the new trend in film making and everybody wants to get on the bandwagon.

I thought Marvel had obtained the Ghost Rider rights back recently.

But I don't think the studios confidence reflects on the films themselves. WB has never seemed to have much faith in its DC properties even when Nolan's Batman films were grossing a billion dollars. They've long been like that. They never had any faith in Richard Donner or Tim Burton either.

 

[kedrell]

I was glad they left out the great power/responsibility line in TASM. Nobody talks like that. They got the gist of the idea across in a more believable way. But then I hate catch-phrases usually. All they serve is to pull you out of the film and say "hey, look at me...I'M A CATCH-PHRASE!". I hate'em. I say leave them in the comics where they fit.

 

[kedrell]

I thought Marvel had obtained the Ghost Rider rights back recently.

But I don't think the studios confidence reflects on the films themselves. WB has never seemed to have much faith in its DC properties even when Nolan's Batman films were grossing a billion dollars. They've long been like that. They never had any faith in Richard Donner or Tim Burton either.

I really don't know. The first film was Sony and they made a sequel pretty fast with the same actor so I just figured it was Sony as well.

 

[InJustice]

What "ruined" (since I still love TASM) was the villain. Lizard has no reason for anyone to care about him, and honestly if he didn't exist in the movie, no one would care. And as Goyer said, the hero is only as good as his villain. Spider-Man has some compelling rogues gallery that it's almost a shame that the creative team used The Lizard instead. I'm even more sad that Electro's in it, but I'll wait and see what role he plays.

At least General Zod in MOS was compelling and almost a tragic hero. You could make the argument that Zod thought he was the Superman of Krypton, more so than Kal-El himself. Which makes their dynamic that much more interesting.

 

[kedrell]

And as Goyer said, the hero is only as good as his villain.

I find that is only true when you have an otherwise lackluster hero.

And a lot of people I talked to in my circle thought Shannon was sleepwalking through the role as Zod. I don't necessarily agree but I've heard that rather often. The Lizard was ok. His scheme was simple and very comic book. Sure, more could have been done with him like adding his family and tightening up some plot holes around him. I'd rank both of them as ok villains. However, Lizard was a first for that character while Zod has to live in the shadow of a more iconic portrayal.

 

[flickchick85]

And as Goyer said, the hero is only as good as his villain.

OT, but I've never bought into that phrase at all. A hero is only as good as his journey, as far as I'm concerned, and the villain's importance in that journey can completely vary depending on the story being told. There are plenty of great CBM's (and other stories) with unimpressive or merely adequate villains, imo, because the hero's emotional journey took center stage.

 

[PacificBoy]

TASM for me. Was more fun and more of the titular character I could identify with.