How different will Spidey 3 look from previous movies?

[JayKay]

JB is exactly franchise like Harry Potter. And BTW, at nowadays only first JB movies looked good (except Golden Eye).

Me not.

Harry Potter is an adaption, just like Spider-Man, that has successfully survived multiple directors.

And what is wrong with your grammar?

 

[Cmill216]

And what is wrong with your grammar?

He's foreign.

 

[Cinemaman]

Harry Potter is an adaption, just like Spider-Man, that has successfully survived multiple directors.

And what is wrong with your grammar?

Harry Potter isn't superhero.

Look at Batman, Superman and X3.

And, I said "me not" as a joke.

 

[JayKay]

Harry Potter isn't superhero.

Look at Batman, Superman and X3.

Strange powers? Parents dead? Lives with auntie and uncle? Young? Wears glasses?

Now where have I seen that before..

Anyway, Spider-Man being a superhero is completely irrelevant. The examples you listed above all failed because the new directors treated the franchise as a joke. Sony isn't going to be as foolish with this franchise.

 

[Cmill216]

Just to jump in your convo, Harry Potter and Spidey's franchises are different in the level of complexity in the adaptation. With each Potter film, they're only focusing on trimming down one book and finding their narrative through those pages. However, it's all layed out for them. So even with a different directorial vision on each film, it's hard to stray too far from the source since it's right in front of them.

With Spidey, you're dealing with a completely different animal. After each Spidey film people have debated what should be in the next one, basing their guesses on what the last film did and the hundreds of stories over a span of 40 years in Spidey lore. That point alone should show you how important a single vision or at least a focused universal vision amongst writer/director/producer is to this franchise.

With Sam/Laura/Alvin and Co. together through the films, it's kept things tight and cohesive, taking what could have been a very disorderly franchise because of the abundance of villains and characters and unique visions out there into a strong "trilogy" (if one wants to call it that).

 

[JayKay]

Just to jump in your convo, Harry Potter and Spidey's franchises are different in the level of complexity in the adaptation. With each Potter film, they're only focusing on trimming down one book and finding their narrative through those pages. However, it's all layed out for them. So even with a different directorial vision on each film, it's hard to stray too far from the source since it's right in front of them.

With Spidey, you're dealing with a completely different animal. After each Spidey film people have debated what should be in the next one, basing their guesses on what the last film did and the hundreds of stories over a span of 40 years in Spidey lore. That point alone should show you how important a single vision or at least a focused universal vision amongst writer/director/producer is to this franchise.

With Sam/Laura/Alvin and Co. together through the films, it's kept things tight and cohesive, taking what could have been a very disorderly franchise because of the abundance of villains and characters and unique visions out there into a strong "trilogy" (if one wants to call it that).

It is still stupid to say a new director is a guarantee to ruin the franchise

 

[Cinemaman]

Strange powers? Parents dead? Lives with auntie and uncle? Young? Wears glasses?

Now where have I seen that before..

Anyway, Spider-Man being a superhero is completely irrelevant. The examples you listed above all failed because the new directors treated the franchise as a joke. Sony isn't going to be as foolish with this franchise.

Yeah, but Potter doesn't wear suit and he use magic wand.

We will see

 

[Cmill216]

It is still stupid to say a new director is a guarantee to ruin the franchise

Of course it's stupid to say that. Is that what my boy Cine is going on about?

 

[Cinemaman]

Just to jump in your convo, Harry Potter and Spidey's franchises are different in the level of complexity in the adaptation. With each Potter film, they're only focusing on trimming down one book and finding their narrative through those pages. However, it's all layed out for them. So even with a different directorial vision on each film, it's hard to stray too far from the source since it's right in front of them.

With Spidey, you're dealing with a completely different animal. After each Spidey film people have debated what should be in the next one, basing their guesses on what the last film did and the hundreds of stories over a span of 40 years in Spidey lore. That point alone should show you how important a single vision or at least a focused universal vision amongst writer/director/producer is to this franchise.

With Sam/Laura/Alvin and Co. together through the films, it's kept things tight and cohesive, taking what could have been a very disorderly franchise because of the abundance of villains and characters and unique visions out there into a strong "trilogy" (if one wants to call it that).

Agreed

 

[Cinemaman]

Of course it's stupid to say that. Is that what my boy Cine is going on about?

I was trying to explain that new directors usually isn't good idea (especially with superhero movies).

 

[JayKay]

Of course it's stupid to say that. Is that what my boy Cine is going on about?

Yes it is.

Yeah, but Potter doesn't wear suit and he use magic wand.

Doesn't really matter. Harry Potter's franchise could have been ruined when the director changed on the third film, but it didn't. It survived again when another new director came onto the fourth.

Spider-Man has a chance.

 

[Cinemaman]

Yes it is.


Doesn't really matter. Harry Potter's franchise could have been ruined when the director changed on the third film, but it didn't. It survived again when another new director came onto the fourth.

Spider-Man has a chance.

I think you should learn how to read.

I'm not going to tell you this again, because you won't understand this (even cmill216 tried to explain you this).

 

[JayKay]

I think you should learn how to read.

I'm not going to tell you this again, because you won't understand this (even cmill216 tried to explain you this).

Um, I haven't missed any point. Don't tell me I can't read.

The simple FACT is Harry Potter had the POTENTIAL to make a turn for the worse when it changed directors, and it is not guaranteed that Spider-Man will suffer from a change in director, although it has the POTENTIAL to be. Any differences in the frachises are irrelevant.

I don't see why this isn't clear?

 

[The Joker]

I hope this time, it won't happen with Brock. Raimi really likes to do it, but it wouldn't work with every new Sidey's villian.

Like I said, I doubt it will happen with Brock. Harry and Sandman seem to be very humanistic villains in this one.

Yeah I know. But I wanted to see more logical motive for bank robbery.

Look, just explain me why did Ock need to rob bank and then, I will explain my point of view.

Yeah, it looked great, but what was exact motive for Ock to do it (bank robbery)?

What don't you get about him needing money to get the fusion reactor parts??

You claim he could just go and look for them. From the crates in the warehouse, it looks like he needed to order them from somewhere, probably abroad.

I can't imagine every lab in the New York state area has a fusion reactor. Considering in the movie, tritium is very rare. And therefore fusion reactors would be too.

He had very useful role. He was working on Ras and he made this fear gas, which would kill all people in Gotham (what Ras needed).

Useful, yes. Fleshed out, no.

He was a very 2D villain.

Why we need Scarecrow's suit? It would look campy (just like GG's). Just look at Ock, he didn't have his one and this still worked.

Crane was smart bad guy, who turned himself into the ghost.

GG's movie suit wasn't the comic one. Ock could have worn his white armani suit from the comics in the movie. But Raimi opted for the trenchcoat look, as it was more realistic.

Why does Scarecrow need his costume?? Ummmm because he's the Scarecrow. If you're going to do a outlandish villain like that, then do it right.

If Nolan deprives Joker of his purple suit, then he's a fool.

 

[Red]

If Nolan deprives Joker of his purple suit, then he's a fool.

Sig worthy

 

[Cinemaman]

Like I said, I doubt it will happen with Brock. Harry and Sandman seem to be very humanistic villains in this one.



What don't you get about him needing money to get the fusion reactor parts??

You claim he could just go and look for them. From the crates in the warehouse, it looks like he needed to order them from somewhere, probably abroad.

I can't imagine every lab in the New York state area has a fusion reactor. Considering in the movie, tritium is very rare. And therefore fusion reactors would be too.



Useful, yes. Fleshed out, no.

He was a very 2D villain.



GG's movie suit wasn't the comic one. Ock could have worn his white armani suit from the comics in the movie. But Raimi opted for the trenchcoat look, as it was more realistic.

Why does Scarecrow need his costume?? Ummmm because he's the Scarecrow. If you're going to do a outlandish villain like that, then do it right.

If Nolan deprives Joker of his purple suit, then he's a fool.

I hope you're right.

He could steel them.

Besides, he is supervillian, he can beat everyone (except Spidey), so it wouldn't be problem.

And who could sale it him?

Because he supposed to be 2nd villian.

But still, it looked like usual supervillian's suit (I am talking about GG's).

Nolan won't do this (but this doesn't mean Joker will be wearing his purple suit in every his scene).

And Scarecrow didn't have his exact suit.

 

[Tanin]

Yeah, but Potter doesn't wear suit and he use magic wand.

We will see

Potter would of worn a suit....has the movies not ****ed up and made them wear muggle clothing at all times

 

[fallenAngel]

I don't think I will ever understand this facination and constant complaining about peoples costumes. I mean sure since comics are a visual medium as are films it makes it more exciting to see the same suits on screen for iconic purposes (or atleast close too) but people never shut up about it. Its not as if it will suddenly raise the movie to a higher level.

Look at Fantastic four, the suits were almost spot on (with the exception of everyone complaining about the brow on the Things head). And yet this movie is one of the worst, if not the worst, super hero movie to come out recently.

 

[The Joker]

Sig worthy

LOL! Shucks dude, it's just the truth

He could steel them.

Besides, he is supervillian, he can beat everyone (except Spidey), so it wouldn't be problem.

You seem like a nice chap, so I'm going to end this part of the debate here, because you're not acknowledging what I'm saying.

I've already stated, Ock had to order the parts, most likely from abroad, or at the very least somewhere not in New York. Hence the many crates in the warehouse. And for that he needed money.

Tritium was rare, so fusion reactors would be too. Hence why he HAD to order them. Can't pick them up anywhere.

And who could sale it him?

Anybody you like. All he had to do was send an order to somewhere with the cash, and have it delivered to an anonymous location.

Because he supposed to be 2nd villian.

Scarecrow?? Have you ever read his comics?? We know alot more about Jonathan Crane than we do about the Joker. You're not going to tell me Joker is 2D are you??

But still, it looked like usual supervillian's suit (I am talking about GG's).

Usual supervillain's suit?? Like who's?? Who else had a suit like that??

Nolan won't do this (but this doesn't mean Joker will be wearing his purple suit in every his scene).

It better be his main costume. Joker without his purple suit is like Batman without a cape.

And Scarecrow didn't have his exact suit.

He didn't have anything except for the mask.

 

[JayKay]

Potter would of worn a suit....has the movies not ****ed up and made them wear muggle clothing at all times

Woah, what?

I've read the books, Harry doesn't wear any kind of suit that is distinguishable from muggle clothing..

 

[JayKay]

GG's movie suit wasn't the comic one. Ock could have worn his white armani suit from the comics in the movie. But Raimi opted for the trenchcoat look, as it was more realistic.

What's more realistic about a trenchcoat than an armani suit

Do you mean that a trenchcoat was more APPROPRIATE for the situation Doc Ock was in for SM2?

 

[Tanin]

Woah, what?

I've read the books, Harry doesn't wear any kind of suit that is distinguishable from muggle clothing..

When in the wizard community they all wear flowing robes and pointed hats.

It is talked about in book one and never really mentioned again.



Oh and he doesn't need to use his wand to use his powers, it acts as a focusing point for his powers. <He was using powers before he got his wand....he just didn't know how.>

 

[The Joker]

What's more realistic about a trenchcoat than an armani suit

Do you mean that a trenchcoat was more APPROPRIATE for the situation Doc Ock was in for SM2?

Yes, exactly.

Plus, it helped him conceal the tentacles, like in the bank.

 

[Cinemaman]

LOL! Shucks dude, it's just the truth



You seem like a nice chap, so I'm going to end this part of the debate here, because you're not acknowledging what I'm saying.

I've already stated, Ock had to order the parts, most likely from abroad, or at the very least somewhere not in New York. Hence the many crates in the warehouse. And for that he needed money.

Tritium was rare, so fusion reactors would be too. Hence why he HAD to order them. Can't pick them up anywhere.



Anybody you like. All he had to do was send an order to somewhere with the cash, and have it delivered to an anonymous location.



Scarecrow?? Have you ever read his comics?? We know alot more about Jonathan Crane than we do about the Joker. You're not going to tell me Joker is 2D are you??



Usual supervillain's suit?? Like who's?? Who else had a suit like that??



It better be his main costume. Joker without his purple suit is like Batman without a cape.



He didn't have anything except for the mask.

Ok, I'll agree with you.

Hey, I read comics. And Scarecrow supposed to be in BB 2nd villian (Ras was 1st). Nolan used very unusual structre of superhero movies and that is why people loved BB.

Catwoman, Zod, Magneto and etc. I am saying exact suit, but still they looked a bit like suits from comics. Still GG had very Goblin-ish mask.

Well, no it isn't so. Just look at B89. Burton didn't use purple suit in every scene and it worked. But I am sure Nolan will show us it.

Mask, which he aslo had in BB. Nolan was trying to make everything in BB very realistic staying faithful to comics.

 

[JayKay]

When in the wizard community they all wear flowing robes and pointed hats.

It is talked about in book one and never really mentioned again.

I don't remember that.. It's obviously not important if it was never mentioned again.

And isn't the school uniform a flowing robe in the movies?