His webslinging still looks off

[ultimatefan]

Well it is clear we disagree with the movements of his swing. That isn't complacent, that is difference of opinion. The definition of being complacent is to accept, settle or compromise with something you are not wholly satisfied with. I am satisfied with the web-swinging.

As for the clips. I see your poin, that he should land on all fours sticking more (though he has done it on several occasions in the films, including the flagpole at the end of 1, when he swings into the burning building in 1, during his fight with Ock on top of the train and belltower in 2 and when he lands on the light in black suit in the trailer for 3) but the director has chosen to have just as many landings on two feet without the adhesiveness taken into account.

In doing so making a two footed landing as you want would ook very off because the physics are against it and our eyes would instinctively be turned off by it (think of how DD landed one of his early leaps in his movie and how off it looked ah he hit the ground runng, same with both Elektra jumps later on). But to make it work he has to stick his landing.

For the record the one in SM3 trailer in front of the flag looks good while the trailer one looks a little off but it was early in his career and they have perfected it since then. And keep in mind your preferred landings have happened mulltiple times in both 1 and 2 and is even present in the SM3 trailer.

This to me constitutes nitpicking, but you may disagree.

Thank you. One person enjoys one thing more than another, for different reasons, and both can be valid. Simple as that.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Thank you. One person enjoys one thing more than another, for different reasons, and both can be valid. Simple as that.

exactly.

 

[ISHMAEL]

the idea is to make him look agile but real.

the more flaws there are with him swinging the more believable he looks doing it.

body jolting = gravity
legs not together = realism (if they were together it would look more obviously CGI)

you are right tho... he doesn't move like in the comic.

but my rebuttle is also.. when he was knocked off the train in SM2.. that recovery (off the street, up the side of the building and the leap) was soooo comic book.. my fav part of the film by far

yes that scence was very comic bookish it really showed spidey at his best in the movies

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

yes that scence was very comic bookish it really showed spidey at his best in the movies

that scene was amazing!!!!, spideys web-slinging in the movies is perfect, i dont know why some people are complaining about it, its fine.

 

[dark_b]

that scene was amazing!!!!, spideys web-slinging in the movies is perfect, i dont know why some people are complaining about it, its fine.

the ones who complain could the same ask you. why to you not complain?

i hope you know what i mean.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

the ones who complain could the same ask you. why to you not complain?

i hope you know what i mean.

i dont complain because i think web-slinging is fine.

 

[dark_b]

i dont complain because i think web-slinging is fine.

and they complain because they dont think web-slinging is fine.

is this a game that you play or do you make fun?

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

and they complain because they dont think web-slinging is fine.

is this a game that you play or do you make fun?

can you ask me this question in a simple way?

 

[November Rain]

Well i made this thread awhile ago showing my reservations for what i thought about the webslinging and guess what folks, i was right...

the webslinging in this film looked far worse than it did for parts of the second film which i already thought was a step down from the first film ending scene. All the webslinging in this film looked like the real bad parts right at the beginning of the second film where he's swinging with the pizza box.

the best ones of the film were the rehashed versions of the second film's end sequence shown right at the beginning.

I hope some of you that were against me could now see my reasoning and can then show my initial thoughts were well placed and that i wasn't just being a rabid fan looking for something to pick on.

later...

 

[dark_b]

Well i made this thread awhile ago showing my reservations for what i thought about the webslinging and guess what folks, i was right...

the webslinging in this film looked far worse than it did for parts of the second film which i already thought was a step down from the first film ending scene. All the webslinging in this film looked like the real bad parts right at the beginning of the second film where he's swinging with the pizza box.

the best ones of the film were the rehashed versions of the second film's end sequence shown right at the beginning.

I hope some of you that were against me could now see my reasoning and can then show my initial thoughts were well placed and that i wasn't just being a rabid fan looking for something to pick on.

later...

i remember at the beginning the scene from spiderman 2. but wast that part of the opening sequnce? this was from 3?
looked 100% the same

 

[TNC9852002]

There actually wasn't a whole lot of dynamic webslinging in the third movie...The main ones were probably just when he was fighting Harry at the beginning and Sandman in the tunnel..

-TNC

 

[November Rain]

i remember at the beginning the scene from spiderman 2. but wast that part of the opening sequnce? this was from 3?
looked 100% the same

i don't understand your queries...please ask them again but try to get your point across..

when i say openning sequence it was shown right after the credits, the scenes were very similar although there were slight differences like spidey doing a sommersault inbetween weblines and so on and so forth...

but in general it was a rehash of the last scene of the old film.

 

[November Rain]

There actually wasn't a whole lot of dynamic webslinging in the third movie...The main ones were probably just when he was fighting Harry at the beginning and Sandman in the tunnel..

-TNC

well thank goodness this thread isn't called

'His wallcrawling looks off otherwise we'd have nothing at all to talk about'



i can't believe venom did more wallcrawling that spidey, how bad is that?

 

[dark_b]

i don't understand your queries...please ask them again but try to get your point across..

when i say openning sequence it was shown right after the credits, the scenes were very similar although there were slight differences like spidey doing a sommersault inbetween weblines and so on and so forth...

but in general it was a rehash of the last scene of the old film.

in spiderman 3 at the beginning they showed clips from spiderman 1 nad 2 right?
t:
at the beginning of spiderman 3(teh opening sequence of clips from 1 and 2) i saw the final swing from spiderman 2. am i right or did i saw a spiderman 3 scene that was pathetic similar from spiderman 2?

 

[dark_b]

well thank goodness this thread isn't called

'His wallcrawling looks off otherwise we'd have nothing at all to talk about'



i can't believe venom did more wallcrawling that spidey, how bad is that?

spidermans powers were pathetic in 3 IMO. tehy showed us nothing new.

 

[Dragon]

The History Channel ran a show last week called "Spider-Man Tech" explaining how it's scientifically possible to create Spider-Man. They analyzed his web-SWINGING (It annoys me how people mistake this- Web-SLINGING is his firing the weblines) and said how his motion is correct.

 

[Tony Stark]

In terms of special effects, Spidey 3 will have to go a long way to match the almost 100% real-looking Superman Returns.

Yeah a guy with no visible means of propulsion lifting a rock the size of a large city from the ocean, gee that was realistic. Made of Kryptonite no less, but we all know Superman just has to try real hard to lift Kryptonite.

 

[conan69]

It looked the worst in the first film.

It looked pretty great in the second and even better in the third.

 

[Eggyman]

It's hard to say about his web-swinging in this third film -- I've seen the film twice and can hardly remember Spidey being in the damn thing. I did like the film, but it showed little of web head. One swing scene springs to mind, when he's on his way to the crane desaster . . . that was meh IMO, they had the swinging better in the first film.

 

[Visionary]

Yeah a guy with no visible means of propulsion lifting a rock the size of a large city from the ocean, gee that was realistic. Made of Kryptonite no less, but we all know Superman just has to try real hard to lift Kryptonite.

Haha...

People just don't understand that web-slinging is a lot harder to pull off than flying.

 

[Alexia Dark]

At least now, when he jumps, it doesn't have the look of 'Up, up and away, wire!'

 

[November Rain]

The History Channel ran a show last week called "Spider-Man Tech" explaining how it's scientifically possible to create Spider-Man. They analyzed his web-SWINGING (It annoys me how people mistake this- Web-SLINGING is his firing the weblines) and said how his motion is correct.

what is correct?

there are at least four different variations of it, some done with live people, some done close up, some completely cgi, some cut with real life motion.

various sections both inside similar films and betwen the three look different from one another.

How could they 'all' look correct?



as for the sling/swing, i can't do anything about the thread title, let it go...


besides, looking correct and looking dazzling are completely different things, it's not like the spidey films are renouned for their acurate portrayal of real life powers/events, people turn to skeletons before they explode and you can see lightening around them when they get electrocuted...

 

[Dragon]

what is correct?

there are at least four different variations of it, some done with live people, some done close up, some completely cgi, some cut with real life motion.

various sections both inside similar films and betwen the three look different from one another.

How could they 'all' look correct?

Because they're all done under the same principles, by the same crew dictating the approach. Spidey really only does two types of swings. The straight "Tarzan" type swing, and letting the webline's bungee effect propel him. The variations come in direction, speed and so forth.

as for the sling/swing, i can't do anything about the thread title, let it go...

Just pointing out the difference.

besides, looking correct and looking dazzling are completely different things, it's not like the spidey films are renouned for their acurate portrayal of real life powers/events, people turn to skeletons before they explode and you can see lightening around them when they get electrocuted...

Alright, well, the subject is about the swinging, not the exploding skeletons, which I would tend to agree with you about.

 

[Eternalzero]

Really, what and how is his web slinging supposed to look like? Comics can't show fluidity, just stills. Not to mention in movie there is air resistance. Sure he lands hard, but he's probably moving really fast too.

 

[Sun_Down]

Really, what and how is his web slinging supposed to look like? Comics can't show fluidity, just stills. Not to mention in movie there is air resistance. Sure he lands hard, but he's probably moving really fast too.

Agreed. While I've always felt the actual CG model of Spidey looked very fake and his actual body movements were way too fluid, his swinging always looked pretty good.