Is there a possibility of an Raimi's Spider-Man returning?

[The Joker]

But it doesn't make a those movies similar. TASM had completely different tone, completely different characters, action and the story. And as I know Lizard often turns good at the end, so I don't see no problem there.

The only new character was The Lizard. Every other major character we'd seen in Raimi's movies. The tone was different but the furniture of the movie was the same. I'm not saying Lizard turning good was a problem with the character, I'm saying it's something we'd seen before in Raimi's with a scientist villain.

That's why so many were accusing TASM of being unnecessary. It wasn't giving us anything new. A good reboot makes it feel like something you'd never seen before in the previous movies.

Again using Batman Begins as an example, we got a full blown Batman origin, two new villains we'd never seen before and were totally different to the previous ones, a proper developed friendship with Batman and Commissioner Gordon, a new love interest we'd never seen before and was totally different to the previous ones, Batman's supporting cast was expanded with characters like Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox, even the likes of the Batmobile was a whole new beast of a vehicle compared to the previous ones etc.

TASM didn't manage a fifth of anything like that in terms of new ground. It's a dull, boring rehash of many of the Raimi elements, and the only real new element the 'untold story' sub plot with Peter's parents was as dull as they come.

 

[Spider-knight]

Well that's a personal preference. I'm not going to tell you you're wrong for having a personal taste. X-Men and Iron Man 3 I would both rate as very good movies. Not great, or anything really stand out notable, but good entertaining movies.



The world wasn't ready for it? I assume that's sarcasm.

TASM got 73% so it got it's share of hammering, but I'm not saying it was a critical failure or anything like that. Far from it. I'm saying in the golden age for comic book movies it only got 73%. A really great CBM has no problem getting into the 80's percentage range these days. That's why the likes of Thor 2, Iron Man 3 etc don't get scores like that either in spite of them being part of the sainted MCU. They're not that great.



What you're saying is not true. If it was you'd be able to prove it. It's just a belief/theory you have. Nothing more.

That theory I have could turn out to be true

 

[The Joker]

That theory I have could turn out to be true

Could be yes. But you were saying it is true. Unless you've got a time machine, and the power to rearrange history, you're in no position to say it is true. It's just an unfounded theory of yours. One that can never be proven.

 

[Spider-knight]

The only new character was The Lizard. Every other major character we'd seen in Raimi's movies. The tone was different but the furniture of the movie was the same. I'm not saying Lizard turning good was a problem with the character, I'm saying it's something we'd seen before in Raimi's with a scientist villain.

That's why so many were accusing TASM of being unnecessary. It wasn't giving us anything new. A good reboot makes it feel like something you'd never seen before in the previous movies.

Again using Batman Begins as an example, we got a full blown Batman origin, two new villains we'd never seen before and were totally different to the previous ones, a proper developed friendship with Batman and Commissioner Gordon, a new love interest we'd never seen before and was totally different to the previous ones, Batman's supporting cast was expanded with characters like Morgan Freeman's Lucius Fox, even the likes of the Batmobile was a whole new beast of a vehicle compared to the previous ones etc.

TASM didn't manage a fifth of anything like that in terms of new ground. It's a dull, boring rehash of many of the Raimi elements, and the only real new element the 'untold story' sub plot with Peter's parents was as dull as they come.

It did. The amazing spiderman was just trying to be more faithful to the origin like it has been doing for a while. Saying that its the same story is ridiculous.

 

[The Joker]

It did. The amazing spiderman was just trying to be more faithful to the origin like it has been doing for a while. Saying that its the same story is ridiculous.

How was it trying to be more faithful to the origin? Spider-Man let a convenient store thief go because of some chocolate milk. It didn't happen at the wrestling arena like in the comics. He didn't try and make money off being Spider-Man in a wrestling ring. We never hear the words with great power comes great responsibility. And Peter was never destined to be Spider-Man because of his blood and his father's research but in TASM movies he is.

On what planet is that being more faithful to the origin?

 

[Doctor Octopus]

The amazing spiderman was just trying to be more faithful to the origin like it has been doing for a while.

It failed. Very badly.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

But it doesn't make a those movies similar. TASM had completely different tone, completely different characters, action and the story. And as I know Lizard often turns good at the end, so I don't see no problem there.

All TASM did was take the same Spider-Man elements as Raimi's and planted them into a duller darker Spider-Man movie. But it was still more of the same only worse sadly.

 

[Spider-knight]

How was it trying to be more faithful to the origin? Spider-Man let a convenient store thief go because of some chocolate milk. It didn't happen at the wrestling arena like in the comics. He didn't try and make money off being Spider-Man in a wrestling ring. We never hear the words with great power comes great responsibility. And Peter was never destined to be Spider-Man because of his blood and his father's research but in TASM movies he is.

On what planet is that being more faithful to the origin?

The movie was being faithful to the ultimate origin but retold. Peter let the burglar go in a convienient store, uncle ben paraphrased the famous line, the lizard who is a big green monster attacks Peter in his high school just like goblin did, the Parker's were scientists, how aunt may and uncle ben were portrayed as these regular old folks, Gwen knowing who Peter is before she died, Osborn obsessed with Peter, Peter having bad luck with his identity,

The wrestling ring was removed abd changed for the mask to give Peter this idea of being a hero. I think Peter in this movie did had this idea of being a hero thanks to uncle bens death. I think him catching the buglar was just him being blinded by guilt. One of Spider-Man's characteristics is that he's a guilt ridden hero. The rash full things he did just messed with him a couple of times throughout the years.

 

[The Joker]

The movie was being faithful to the ultimate origin but retold. Peter let the burglar go in a convienient store, uncle ben paraphrased the famous line, the lizard who is a big green monster attacks Peter in his high school just like goblin did, the Parker's were scientists, how aunt may and uncle ben were portrayed as these regular old folks, Gwen knowing who Peter is before she died, Osborn obsessed with Peter, Peter having bad luck with his identity,

You didn't say the Ultimate origin. You said 'It did. The amazing spiderman was just trying to be more faithful to the origin like it has been doing for a while.'

Ultimate Spider-Man is an elsewords title. It's supposed to be very different from the regular comics. So saying it's trying to be like the Ultimate comics, which are not the true Spider-Man comics, is no defense. You're talking about a title with a monster Goblin, a Magneto Doc Ock etc.

The wrestling ring was removed abd changed for the mask to give Peter this idea of being a hero. I think Peter in this movie did had this idea of being a hero thanks to uncle bens death. I think him catching the buglar was just him being blinded by guilt. One of Spider-Man's characteristics is that he's a guilt ridden hero. The rash full things he did just messed with him a couple of times throughout the years.

I know what they did with the wrestling ring. I've seen the movie. You repeating what they did doesn't change the fact that it's not faithful to the origin of Spider-Man. Not even the Ultimate one you're now clinging to.

It's one of the most unfaithful versions of the Spider-Man origin, especially with the whole father's research/Peter's destiny rubbish they've added.

 

[GoodYoung]

The only new character was The Lizard. Every other major character we'd seen in Raimi's movies. The tone was different but the furniture of the movie was the same. I'm not saying Lizard turning good was a problem with the character, I'm saying it's something we'd seen before in Raimi's with a scientist villain.

That's why so many were accusing TASM of being unnecessary. It wasn't giving us anything new. A good reboot makes it feel like something you'd never seen before in the previous movies.

I mean those characters were given a very different personality.


A lot of people, including me, were really happy, when they decided to reboot the franshise. I really like Sam Raimi but he shouldn't come anywhere near Spider-Man imo.

 

[The Joker]

I mean those characters were given a very different personality.

That's another thing. A lot of people hated Garfield's Peter Parker. They thought he was a moody, arrogant, jerk. But I digress. My point is giving them a different personality is still having the same characters and not doing anything radically different with them. Batman Begins didn't just give Batman a new personality and expect that to be enough. They took the character, and his character relationships in whole new directions never seen before in the previous Batman movies.

Again that's why TASM was often accused of being unnecessary. It didn't break any new ground like a reboot should.

A lot of people, including me, were really happy, when they decided to reboot the franshise. I really like Sam Raimi but he shouldn't come anywhere near Spider-Man imo.

You're a drop in the ocean. The detractors of Raimi are far out numbered by the fans. That also goes for the movies. Raimi's movies are still holding their own. I don't see that changing any time soon either.

The TASM franchise has utterly failed to grab fans and audiences the way Raimi's did. Raimi took Spider-Man to the highest of heights. He's done more good for him than TASM and it's awful sequel ever did. I'm positive Sony would agree with that, too lol.

 

[Spider-knight]

You didn't say the Ultimate origin. You said 'It did. The amazing spiderman was just trying to be more faithful to the origin like it has been doing for a while.'

Ultimate Spider-Man is an elsewords title. It's supposed to be very different from the regular comics. So saying it's trying to be like the Ultimate comics, which are not the true Spider-Man comics, is no defense. You're talking about a title with a monster Goblin, a Magneto Doc Ock etc.



I know what they did with the wrestling ring. I've seen the movie. You repeating what they did doesn't change the fact that it's not faithful to the origin of Spider-Man. Not even the Ultimate one you're now clinging to.

It's one of the most unfaithful versions of the Spider-Man origin, especially with the whole father's research/Peter's destiny rubbish they've added.

An else worlds story yet it recieved a huge number of popularity with and is the most iconic and made more than the 616 version.

Marc wanted the origin to be different so he just changed the wrestling part. I think it was a really clever idea

Yes the goblin was a monster but Norman was still the guy we love.

 

[The Joker]

An else worlds story yet it recieved a huge number of popularity with and is the most iconic and made more than the 616 version.

Ultimate Spider-Man is more iconic than 616 Spider-Man?

You really do live in your own little fantasy world.

Marc wanted the origin to be different

He succeeded.

Yes the goblin was a monster but Norman was still the guy we love.

He was turned into the Hulk. A Scientist who can transform into a big strong green monster in purple pants.

 

[GoodYoung]

That's another thing. A lot of people hated Garfield's Peter Parker. They thought he was a moody, arrogant, jerk. But I digress. My point is giving them a different personality is still having the same characters and not doing anything radically different with them. Batman Begins didn't just give Batman a new personality and expect that to be enough. They took the character, and his character relationships in whole new directions never seen before in the previous Batman movies.

Actually, a lot of people like him much more than Tobey McParker.
But I get your point about BB and I agree, yeah.

You're a drop in the ocean. The detractors of Raimi are far out numbered by the fans.

I wouldn't say so. Sure, TASM ain't got as much fans as Raimi's but it's 40%/60% right now.

Raimi's movies are still holding their own, and still eclipse both of the TASM movies in that regard. I don't see that changing any time soon either.

To each his own I guess. They may have good review, but God, those movies are unwatchable now, imo.

 

[The Joker]

I wouldn't say so. Sure, TASM ain't got as much fans as Raimi's but it's 40%/60% right now.

I would say so. And it's dropping more and more every day. Though in fairness TASM 2 dealt it a much bigger blow than TASM.

To each his own I guess. They may have good review, but God, those movies are unwatchable now, imo.

Yeah like I said you're the drop in the ocean there. Like someone else posted proof of, even the all time greats like The Godfather have got detractors. But their popularity always wins out by a long way, and that goes for Raimi's Spider-Man movies. Well the first two anyway. Spider-Man 3 is still divided.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Empire did a vote for 500 greatest movies of all time. Votes came from 10'000 readers, 150 of Hollywood's finest, and 50 key film critics. Spider-Man 1 got 437 place and Spider-Man 2 got 411 place.

http://www.empireonline.com/500/

 

[Spider-knight]

Ultimate Spider-Man is more iconic than 616 Spider-Man?

You really do live in your own little fantasy world.

I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS MORE ICONIC THAN THE 616 VERSION! I SAID IT WAS ALSO ICONIC!

He succeeded.

That he did

He was turned into the Hulk. A Scientist who can transform into a big strong green monster in purple pants.

Norman still has the same traits as the 616 version but seemed even more sadistic like much if his scenes when he's trapped in shield and even murdering his own son.


I was bothered by monster goblin but as time changed It actually grew on me. He seemed more satantic which gave the new vibe of the ultimate spiderman series. He's exactly the kind of guy you can be afraid of.

That doesn't mean I want ultimate goblin in the media but I just wasnt bothered by this goblin anymore

 

[Doctor Octopus]

Best Ultimate version of a Spider-Man villain was Dr. Octopus until they turned him into a guy with Magneto like powers.

 

[LizardMan07]

Who started the webb/raimi debate again?

I don't know why it keeps happening, sure, you can have your personal favorites, (I prefer TASM) but from an objective point of view, that is, BO and RT, there's no competition.

SM1, SM2 and even SM3 gave the general audience their view of spiderman, TASM will never replace that.

You can like or dislike any movie you want, but once we start to get to the numbers, there's really no competition

 

[spiderman2]

Empire did a vote for 500 greatest movies of all time. Votes came from 10'000 readers, 150 of Hollywood's finest, and 50 key film critics. Spider-Man 1 got 437 place and Spider-Man 2 got 411 place.

http://www.empireonline.com/500/

What that is a surprise expecialy because sm 1 has not aged while and sm2 has aged amazing while.

 

[GoodYoung]

Empire did a vote for 500 greatest movies of all time. Votes came from 10'000 readers, 150 of Hollywood's finest, and 50 key film critics. Spider-Man 1 got 437 place and Spider-Man 2 got 411 place.

http://www.empireonline.com/500/

So? It also has Transformers on 308. This automatically makes T1 better SM2, X2 and Batman 89, It's fact
Are you seriously think those reviews, votes, etc really defines what are great movies?
Here's an another Empire top 300 of the best movies oat.
http://www.empireonline.com/301/list.asp?page=28
The Dark Knight is #3 I do love this movie but no way it's the third best movie of the humanity.
And then there's bad movies like The Avengers on #16. So I guess TA is better than Scarface, No Country for Old Men and Jurassic Park.

 

[GoodYoung]

Yeah like I said you're the drop in the ocean there. Like someone else posted proof of, even the all time greats like The Godfather have got detractors. But their popularity always wins out by a long way, and that goes for Raimi's Spider-Man movies. Well the first two anyway. Spider-Man 3 is still divided.

Is it really a bad thing? Well, if not loving The Avengers or SM2 means being in the minority then I'm fine with it. The success of those movies only shows how very little people need to be satisfied.

 

[The Joker]

No, it's a great thing. I wouldn't wish it any other way. It would be a very sad state of affairs for cinema if the majority thought brilliant movies like those were bad. Believe me when I say I am very glad your train of thought on that score is the minority. Long may it stay that way.