John August about SM3 Script...

[Miranda Fox]

I do agree with those who feel John overestimates his own writing talent somewhat (he's good but the dude does have an ego).

Having said that, his blog is really quite interesting to read. I remember reading his entry about the casting process, which was certainly an eye-opener.

As to his recent entry - eh, writers often do this. The guy who wrote PoTC wrote a piece about SR IIRC.

 

[KappeiJin]

As far as I can remember they always have been... it's part of the genre in a way.

Yes, but there's a limit. In a note, John said about the meteorite accident that he does not want to rewrite the origins of characters but just to make a ring of events tied for bring substance and orientation at the story. That's almost the opposite of what happens in SM3, where so many essential points were relegated to "just because" and audience must accept that without no question. Just a matter of quantity, prequels were not so weak in this terms.

 

[Alexia Dark]

"The fans wanted Gwen."

Yeah. 1 or 2 movies ago.

 

[SLYspyder]

Yes, there's a lot of coincidences in this movie. There are in the previous ones as well.

Funny thing though is, this guy doesn't seem to be capable of discerning coincidences from non-coincidences. I mean... "Gwen Stacy happens to be in Peter's class". That's not a coincidence, because she's introduced as a person in his class. If that's a coincidence then that MJ lived next to Peter, etc is as well. But that's not coincidences, it's the frickin' base of the character.
Likewise, it is clearly a coincidence that a meteorite with a symbiote strikes near Peter's bike... it is not a coincidence that the symbiote attaches itself to Peter's bike. It sensed possible hosts and went for it.

Just seems funny that someone writing about coincidences hardly knows what one is.

That said, yes... there's plenty of coincidences in there. As are there in the comics, as are there in the previous movie. Coincidence is a trait of comic book stories in general.

Edit:
A few examples from Spider-Man 2 off the top of my head:
- Doc Ock knows Connors.
- Doc Ock's sponsor is Harry Osborn.
- MJ is going to marry the son of JJJ.
- JJJ's regular photagrapher for certain events is off/sick/whatever, so Peter has to photograph the event where MJ's connection to JJJ's son is revealed.
- It's been two years since Green Goblin died (or something on that time scale), but as soon as the first new super-powered villain since then shows up, Peter loses his powers.
- Peter and May are at a bank at the same time that Ock decides to rob one, and it's the same bank.

Very good post

 

[Alexia Dark]

Hmm. Then I guess the question is 'Why is to so glaringly obvious in SM3?'. The answer... is SCRIPT. Or lackthereof.

 

[pjspider1C]

Spider-Man 3 offers more characters, more plot, more conflict, more humor, and as a result, more coincidences. So, in turn, shouldn't we be just a bit more forgiving?

 

[Alexia Dark]

Spider-Man 3 offers more characters, more plot, more conflict, more humor, and as a result, more coincidences. So, in turn, shouldn't we be just a bit more forgiving?

If only there had been more quality, that would've been great. But no... Venom and Sandman's character development was replaced by Peter turning to the Dork Side.

No, that wasn't a typo.

 

[pjspider1C]

If only there had been more quality, that would've been great. But no... Venom and Sandman's character development was replaced by Peter turning to the Dork Side.

No, that wasn't a typo.

The film is about Peter Parker. Not the villians.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I loved Big Fish!

It's shocking how lazy that screenplay must have been, just shocking.

Very lazy indeed.

 

[pjspider1C]

Okay, you know what? If you guys can make it better, then quit your *****ing and make it better. I'd love to see you try.

 

[Alexia Dark]

The film is about Peter Parker. Not the villians.

Ok, so where was Peter Parker? Being an ass, 'stayin' alive', or throwing crying fits or temper tentrums. If anything bugged me about SM3 (and oh, it was pretty much everything) it was the fact that I felt NOTHING for Peter.

 

[pjspider1C]

Ok, so where was Peter Parker? Being an ass, 'stayin' alive', or throwing crying fits or temper tentrums. If anything bugged me about SM3 (and oh, it was pretty much everything) it was the fact that I felt NOTHING for Peter.

Well, we did have 2 movies prior to Spider-Man 3 to develop Peter Parker, and at the beginning of Spider-Man 3, he finally has everything he wants and you feel nothing for him? You think you'd at least be happy for the guy...

 

[Alexia Dark]

Okay, you know what? If you guys can make it better, then quit your *****ing and make it better. I'd love to see you try.

Thank you for the invite! I've been meaning to rewrite the movies for quite some time. Unfortunately, life gets in the way of these things. Get me a director's contract, $250 million, casting authority, and 3 years, and I'm damn sure I'd come up with a better product than that cheese-covered pile of poop they called a script.

Actually, I'm half-serious. About the writing it thing. In fact, now that SM3 has come out (I'd been waiting so that I don't open up a plotline I don't think I can't improve upon), I think, as I did with my incomplete first draft of SM1, I will start backwards. SM3 first. Then write the other two, and come back, rewrite, yadda yadda. But enough about my creative process.

 

[Alexia Dark]

Well, we did have 2 movies prior to Spider-Man 3 to develop Peter Parker, and at the beginning of Spider-Man 3, he finally has everything he wants and you feel nothing for him? You think you'd at least be happy for the guy...

I was happy for him for about 5.5 seconds on the web in the park. The second he said the word 'Spider-Man' and went on to compare himself to MJ, he was lost to me. Whatever quality he had to him before, it's gone.

 

[DACrowe]

I loved big Fish but otherwise this guy's credits are not very good movies, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was mediocre for example.

But a lot of his points are valid, albeit you could apply them to the comics but shhh....don't tell the fans that. My actual only problem with the plot devices was the butler and the motivation of why MJ agreed to deal with what Harry said. I mean if they showed she really wanted to do this and that is why she relented to his silly request, fine. But besides that the team-up and the butler being forced to push to the climax quickly.

Still I wouldn't accuse SM2 to be free of short-cut writing (Peter being at the same bank as Doc Ock? Ock stealing money instead of equipment? Ock agreeing to Harry's deal instead of just threatening to kill him if he cooperates? The whole Ock birth scene? Harry knowing where Ock's warehouse is, etc.) but we all love that movie. Selective criticism is not constructive.

And again the guy who wrote Tim Burton's worst movie besides Mars Attacks and Planet of the Apes remake should not be criticizing this film.

 

[DACrowe]

BTW of his minor coincidences, none of them were big deals that bugged me EXCEPT #5, which is the only one he excuses. To me that is ironic.

And he ignores the two worst ones, the team-up which was extremely contrived and the butler. I personally think the latter could have been better written as a confrontation between Harry and the "spectre" of his father arguing why he should and then he turns on the tv and sees MJ in danger as a sand hand hurts someone trying to protect her.

It would've been better than him just letting a butler ease his conscience.

His major complaints I think were partially right. Albeit some could not be helped. Like Eddie going to the same church Spidey does is contrived, but how else are you going to have the origin?

I personally would've liked to also see immediately after he leaves the jazz club and grabs his chest he looks up at the church and feels the suit moving and you see it climbing across his face (like it would later Harry) without the mask and him look horrified in a werewolf style attack. Hence his inner struggle to take it off.

 

[venom892]

I agree with most his points.The weakest thing about this movie was the script and it clearly shows.

 

[J.Howlett]

His points are spot on valid...and as some point out, he didn't go far enough...and this is the fundamental problem with the film....the script. It just doesn't really work at all.

 

[Hoedowned]

BTW, this guy is also writing Shazam.

 

[christpunchers]

chocolate factory was made to be really a magical kids film, sm3 is supposed to continue the magical yet SERIOUS spiderman 1 and 2.... and they failed. the coincidences didnt feel right. you can easily tell that venom/symbiote/eddie the whole thing was just tacked on at the very end.

 

[explode7]

I think I should point this John August dude to this link.

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=spiderman3.htm

Let the mofo try and justify that.

 

[venom892]

Box office numbers don't equal a good story.That box office is like that because it was one of the most hyped movies of all time.It's like saying star wars episode
1 was a good movie because it did great at the box office.

 

[chaseter]

No studios put out movies just to tell a story. They want to make money...I don't think John August is in any place to tell anybody what to do.

 

[venom892]

I'm not saying studios shouldn't want to make money.But the box office still doesn't make it a better movie.

 

[christpunchers]

we're here to talk about what flaws the script has, not how much money it makes. everyone from little kids who cry to their mamas to see spidey to comic fans to your casual movie goers will go see it just because "its the movie to see"..... hell they could have done a movie with absolute zero story (we're actually half way there at some points) and it would have made the same money. its the marketing that gets people in the door. $ does not equal a great story.